Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 UDC 27 ISSN 1451-0928

ÅASOPIS
Teorijsko glasilo Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu

TEOLOÃKI

Broj 9

2

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

3

Teoloãki åasopis, broj 9, 2009. godine. Izdavaå: Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu. Adi Endrea 30, 21000 Novi Sad, Srbija. Tel: +381.(0)21.469-410 Elektronska poãta: nsts@sbb.co.rs Internet stranica: www.nsts-online.org Glavni i odgovorni urednik: prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan. Urednici: mr Nikola Kneæeviñ mr Srœan Sremac. Recenzenti: -prof. dr Heleen Zorgdrager, Ukrainian Catholic University, Ukrajina, Kerk in Actie, Holandija -prof. dr Anne-Marie Kool, Karoly Gaspar Reformed University, Budimpešta, Maðarska; -prof. dr Jasmin Miliñ, Protestantsko teoloãko uåiliãte Mihail Starin, Osijek, Hrvatska; -Kevin Steger, Ph.D. Dallas Baptist University, SAD; -Hank Kanters, D.Min. World Life Centre, Kanada; i -dr Svetislav Rajšiñ, Protestantski teološki fakultet, R. Srbija Prelom: Miloã Moravek Ãtampa: MBM-plas Tiraæ: 500 primeraka ISSN: 1451-0928 UDC: 27

Izdavanje ovog åasopisa finansiralo je Ministarstvo vera Republike Srbije u okviru projekta: "Unapreœivanje verske kulture, verskih sloboda i tolerancije".

4

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 IZ UVODNIKA PRVOGA BROJA TEOLOÃKOG ÅASOPISA

Teoloãki åasopis je godiãnjak Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, u kome se objavljuju radovi profesora i studenata, istorijski dokumenti kao i letopis rada fakulteta. Meœutim, osmiãljen je tako da uskoro moæe da preraste kategoriju godiãnjaka. Åeænja duãe mi je da vidim kako Teoloãki åasopis strategijom kvasca, nenametljivo i nezadræivo, postaje platforma teoloãkog promiãljanja ovde i sada: u naãem duhovnom i kulturnom kontekstu. Upravo ovaj i ovakav kontekst nameñe obavezu ozbiljnog pristupa i tretmana pravoslavne teoloãke misli i to u punini njene istorijske dimenzije. Kontekstualna teoloãka promiãljanja, koja ovaj åasopis priæeljkuje, opravdañe svoj pridev jedino ako budu odraæavala pluralizam hriãñanskih denominacija koji karakteriãe vojvoœansku i ãiru domañu stvarnost. Iz tog razloga, ljubazno pozivam kako pravoslavne tako i katoliåke i protestantsko/evanœeoske teologe i crkvene sluæitelje da svoja bogoslovska razmiãljanja izraze u Teoloãkom åasopisu. Pouåite nas i pouåimo se. Samo istinotraæitelji su istinski Bogotraæitelji. Prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Savremena pastirska sluæba crkve . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 STRUÅNI RADOVI Petar Piliñ Duhovni aspekti bolesti . . . . . . . . .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 5 SADRÆAJ: Reå urednika . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski Traganje za neizrecivim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the front-line . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Komparativni pristup: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 NAUÅNI RADOVI Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . . 141 PREGLEDNI RADOVI Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . 69 Sergej Beuk Osnovne biblijske vere . . . . . . . . . . 203 . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: Pisani i slikani izvori . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Foundations of Biblical Faith . . . . . . . . . . . 7 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . . . . . . .6 Teoloãki åasopis. .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 PAPER IN APPLIED THEOLOGY Petar Piliñ Spiritual Aspects of Illness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski The Quest for the Unspeakable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . 141 OVERVIEW PAPERS Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N° 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Word Forward by the Editor-in-chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Comparative Perspective: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Symbolism of the Feast of Pentakost: Written and Painted Sources . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Contemporary Pastoral Ministry of the Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . 203 . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the Front-Line . . . . .

On ima ulogu da kultiviãe teoloãku misao uzimajuñi u obzir sve tri hriãñanske provenijencije. Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ . ne samo u teoloãkom veñ i u duhovnom smislu. Sagledavajuñi mesto i ulogu Teoloãkog åasopisa unutar verskog konteksta naãe zemlje moæe se slobodno reñi da je njegova uloga afirmativna.nauåni karakter.humanistiåke nauke u jednu koherentnu celinu. inkorporirajuñi tako sve druãtveno .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 7 Reå urednika Kao i prethodni brojevi i ovaj broj se moæe pohvaliti sadræajem koji je interdisciplinarnog karaktera. Upravo ovo ilustruje da Teoloãki åasopis nema samo teoloãko . jer svojom verskom i etniåkom ãarolikoãñu na pravi naåin oslikava i naãe druãtveno okruæenje i samim tim pridonosi izgradnji tolerantnijeg druãtva uopãte. Na taj naåin dolazi do izraæaja i njegova ekumenska dimenzija. veñ i socioloãki. Verujem da ñe deveti broj Teoloãkog åasopisa pre svega pomoñi åitaocima u daljem razvoju teoloãkog iskustva i saznanja i joã jednom dati svoj doprinos kako celokupnom teoloãkom promiãljanju tako i nauci uopãte. razvijajuñi pritom konstruktivni dijalog izmeœu istih. jer svojim svehriãñanskim stavom doprinosi boljem hermenautiåkom pristupu svetopisamskog otkrivenja i same crkvene predaje.

8 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 NAUÅNI RADOVI .

Tarkovski je teæio oslobaœawu od logike linearnog narativa. veñ veãtom upotrebom onih sredstava koji su svojstveni filmu kao mediju. emocionalne izraæajnosti likova i konstruisawa alegorijskih zagonetki iako mu je ovo posledwe åesto pripisivano. Duhovna dimenzija wegovih filmova nije izgraœena religioznim narativom. åuveni reæiser Andrej Tarkovski nastojao je da.5Tarkovski Andrej diplomirani teolog Originalni nauåni rad Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog Primljeno: 11. Primatan je jak uticaj pravoslavne ikonografije i estetskih sredstava koja ona upotrebqava. Wegov primarni ciq bio je da kamerom uhvati samu sræ æivota u svim wegovim dimenzijama.03. veñ je nastojao da tanano sugeriãe i naznaåi ostavqajuñi tako prostor gledaocu da sam naåini pokret ka neizrecivom.03. a ono ãto je nevidqivo i skriveno nije pokuãavao da opisuje i prepriåava. poniruñi u tajnu postojawa sveta i åoveka. Andrej Tarkovski pripada generaciji posleratnih reæisera koji su stvarali nakon perioda dominacije epskog stila Sergeja Ajzenãtajna u kome je montaæa predstavqala .tragawe za neizrecivim Rezime Stvarajuñi svoje filmove. gledaocu pruæi priliku za jedno autentiåno duhovno iskustvo.2010 umetnosti i medija Univerziteta umetnosti u Beogradu irinarados@hotmail.2010 fakulteta BUmaster teorije Prihvañeno: 15.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 9 Irina Radosavqeviñ UDK 929:778.com Andrej Tarkovski .

u kome autor. Uvaæavajuñi veliåinu ove filmske ãkole. 1 A B. Iskusio je neprekidnu borbu sa cenzurom i negativnom kritikom unutar SSSR-a. åiji su filmovi nerazumqivi i nejasni. Kuåev.10 Teoloãki åasopis.To je. Stvaralaãtvo Tarkovskog je nailazilo na topao i dubok prijem kod odreœenog dela publike i taj odgovor publike ga je hrabrio da istraje uprkos svim teãkoñama. prvi princip qudskih odnosa: spremnost da se qudi razumeju i da im se oproste nenamerne greãke. Tako.Meœutim. Metalnikov. sa dubokim æaqewem moram reñi da je wegov film namewen uskom krugu gledalaca koji su dobro upoznati sa kinematografijom“. ozbiqan dijalog samnom kao gledaocem. Radnik u lewingradskoj fabrici pisao je: „Razlog zaãto Vam piãem je Ogledalo. sovjetski kritiåar. Velika je vrlina biti kadar za sluãawe i razumevawe. Ako su dvoje qudi sposbni da makar jednom 1 David Wishard. Tarkovski je ukazivao i na wene nedostatke pokuãavajuñi da pronaœe prisniji i liåniji naåin izraæavawa u filmskoj umetnosti.. razgovara sam sa sobom“.2 Realnost je ipak bila malo drugaåija. samo monolog. uæivajuñi reputaciju mraånog i opskurnog umetnika. ne mareñi za sagovornika. N° 9 osnovno izraæajno sredstvo. a za ispovest je zaista potrebna hrabrost. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity.. M. piãe: „Film Andreja Tarkovskog je filmska ispovest. u ovom filmu dijaloga nema. je o filmu Ogledalo. originalne. zato ãto ga æivim. M.nostalghia. Ali. u kwizi Vajawe u vremenu on navodi delove pisama koje su mu slali poãtovaoci wegovog rada. nakon svega. . wihovi prirodni neuspesi..com 2 Idem. pisao: „Od velikog umetnika oåekujem.. film o kome ne mogu govoriti. ali uvek duboke misli. http://www. takoœe kritiåar sovjetskog perioda.

4 Marina Tarkovska (prireœ. posmatra kao „otuænu religioznu priåu“ i. nisam nikada imao. bilo je i drugaåijih miãqewa poput onog Fredrika Xejmsona. 1999. koji uspeva da uhvati æivot kao refleksiju. jezik koji odgovara prirodi filma. o åeæwi za apsolutnim. onaj koji je stvorio novi jezik. U svim nejasnostima i neodreœenostima Xejmson ne vidi zadivqujuñu 3 Andrej Tarkovski. naãao sam se pred vratima sobe åije kquåeve. Tragaju za istinom o æivotu. Tokom vremena stekli su veliki broj poãtovalaca. http://www. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. prema sopstvenim neistraæenim dubinama. na primer. Prometej. Vajawe u vremenu. moñi ñe da razumeju jedno drugo. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). tumaåa. o wegovom smislu. svetu. on se kretao slobodno i sa lakoñom. Po sobi u koju sam oduvek æeleo da uœem. Bird. netrpeqiv prema bilo kakvoj alegoriji. 8. Novi Sad. wegovom odnosu prema drugom åoveku. Stalkera. 5 Robert.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 11 iskuse isto.com . Umentiåka druæina ANonim.). 1989. a drugi u doba elektriciteta. Tarkovski je za mene najveñi. Bergman je za wega govorio: „Moje otkrivawe prvog filma Andreja Tarkovskog bilo je ravno åudu. a sam Tarkovski status jednog od najznaåajnijih autora svih vremena. Beograd. smatra da je glavni junak u svojoj dosadnoj stradalnoj usamqenosti kojom podseña na Hrista mnogo mawe privlaåan nego socijalno neprilagoœena varalica kako je prikazan u izvornom tekstu. do tada. Wegova kritika5 obojena je podrugqivim odnosom prema rediteqevom „velikom misticizmu“.nostalghia.“4 Ipak. Åak i ako je jedan æiveo u eri mamuta. Odjednom. komentatora.“3 Filmovi Tarkovskog govore o åoveku. Osetio sam ohrabrewe i podsticaj: neko je izraæavao ono ãto sam ja oduvek æeleo da iskaæem a nisam znao kako. æivot kao san.

Ipak ñe biti da u filmovima A. On odbacuje postojawe umetniåke autonomije Tarkovskog i wegov opus shvata samo kao izraz wegovih teorijskih postavki. Sam Tarkovski je bio protivnik alegorije u filmu. potcewujuñi estetiku i strukturu wegovih filmova. N° 9 estetiku Tarkovskog veñ samo alegoriju i ideologiju. Za wega je usporenost kretawa kamere i glumaca „nepodnoãqiva za sve osim za najvernije poklonike Tarkovskog“. Ne uspevajuñi da sagleda celinu wegovog dela. Tako shvañen simbol . On daje æivot metaforama. Ipak. Tarkovskog ne nalazimo jasno i nedvosmisleno iskazan ideoloãki diskurs i da se o takvom diskursu moæe govoriti samo ako se prethodno upoznati autorovi stavovi uåitaju u wegove filmove. Ne prigovara toliko „religioznom sadræaju“ koliko „umetniåkoj pretencioznosti“. navodno visokom umetnoãñu i duboko æali nad „trenutnim sovjetskim religioznim trendom“ koji vidi kao straãnu zarazu. Za razliku od alegorije koja predstavqa formu u kojoj konaåno teæi da se u beskonaånom poniãti i ukine. zadivqen je pred wegovom sposobnoãñu da uhvati „istinu u mahovini“ i „momente u kojima elementi govore“. Xejmson je smatrao da Tarkovski pokuãava da religiozni sadræaj svojih dela opravda. pretenziji na umetnost. odnosno. a ne samo kao religioznu alegoriju ili izraz odreœene ideologije. na pogreãnoj strani. „poetski film“ se svojim slikama udaqava od åiweniånog i konkretnog u oslikavawu stvarnosti afirmisawem sopstvenog ustrojstva i celovitosti. Xejmson odbacuje Tarkovskog kao umetnika (wegovo delo vidi kao neuspeli pokret jednog moraliste ka umetniåkom diskursu) zarad Tarkovskog kao alegoriste (mada je sam Tarkovski iskazivao nepoverewe prema alegoriji) koji je uvuåen u ideoloãki konflikt i to. alegorijama i drugim stilskim figurama u kojima Tarkovski vidi opasnost od udaqavawa filma od sebe samog. simbol je beskonaåno koje se izraæava u konaånom. Po wemu. Ova kritika odaje izvesnu nemoguñnost wenog autora da prodre dubqe u umetniåki diskurs Tarkovskog i da osmotri wegovo delo kao celinu. na æalost.12 Teoloãki åasopis.

. i suoåeni sa tajnim znaåewem u wihovom totalitetu. da ga posmatra kao ãto se posmatraju zvezde ili more.6 Tarkovski je smatrao da film kao celina treba da predstavqa simbol i nosi znaåewe. veñ disati onim åime oni diãu. Smatrao je da svaki gledalac treba sam da doæivi film. Nije neophodno otkriti znaåewe simbola. 46. . mi smo bespomoñni“. ãto je nesaopãtivo reåima. cit.. Ono ãto je Tarkovski æeleo da izbegne jeste nametnuto intelektualno tumaåewe svojih dela i optereñenost gledalaca tim tumaåewem. Ipak. U „Vajawu u vremenu“ on navodi Vjaåeslava Ivanova i wegov komentar o celovitosti umetniåkog dela koje naziva simbolom i taj navod najboqe govori o wegovom viœewu upotrebe simbola: „Simbol je istinit samo onda kada je neiscrpan i neograniåen u svojim znaåewima. ali kao sredstva za iskazivawe neiskazivog pri åemu ono ãto je upotrebqavao kao simbol nikada nije gubilo svoje bukvalno znaåewe da bi mesto ustupilo nekom drugaåijem. neposredno i emocionalno.. Uistinu. i u svojoj najveñoj dubini ostaje nedokuåiv. boqem i uzviãenijem znaåewu koje tek treba odgonetnuti veñ je neposredno delovalo na gledaoca gradeñi celinu i wen smisao. koristio je simbole. 6 Andrej Tarkovski. op. kada u svojoj arkani obelodawuje jezik nagoveãtaja i zbliæavawa s neåim ãto ne moæe biti objaãweno... poput kristala. dok unutar filma simboli lako postaju kliãei koji ga liãavaju realnosti i æivotnosti.Simboli ne mogu biti drugaåije izraæeni niti objaãweni. On je oblikovan prirodnim procesom. on je monada i zato po ustrojewu razliåit od kompleksnih i razloæivih alegorija.. On ima mnogo lica i misli. parabola i poreœewa. govorio je. „Umetnost åini beskonaånost dodirqivom“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 13 bi se mogao povezati sa teæwom Tarkovskog da kroz prikazivawe neposredne stvarnosti iskaæe i ono beskonaåno.

dok je uporno izbegavao da sa wima razgovara o onome ãto bi trebalo da misle ili oseñaju. poput Bresona odbacivao psihologizaciju likova. Smatrao je da je apsurdno traæiti objektivnu istinu te da postoje samo liåne istine. 2008. to jednostavno znaåi da ne radi i niãta osim toga. ravni åudu. Ibid.“8 Tarkovski je. Sami glumci sa kojima je radio svedoåe da je wegovo reæirawe uglavnom bilo ograniåeno na pozicirawe u prostoru i pokret. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. ikonom koja se odupirala linearnoj perspektivi. tako. 73. N° 9 Poqski reæiser Kãiãtof Kiãlovski je jednom prilikom rekao da ukoliko je na filmu prikazan upaqaå koji ne radi. Tarkovski je æeleo da kamerom uhvati sræ æivota i stvarnosti.7 Sliku koja je plod liånog doæivqaja i opaæawa stvarnosti i wenih razliåitih dimenzija. namernim ili nasilnim u odnosu na jedinstvo. „U posledwih nekoliko godina samo je jedan reæiser uspeo da ostvari åudo. . emocionalnoj izra7 8 Robert Bird.14 Teoloãki åasopis. a to je Andrej Tarkovski“. Breson je bio wegov veliki uåiteq: „U svojim filmovima Breson se pretvara u demijurga. Kod wega je sve izbrisano skoro do taåke neizraæajnosti. London. Svojim studentima je govorio : „Nije moguñe fotografisati stvarnost. Nalazimo joã jednu potvrdu sliånosti wegovog stila sa sredwevekovnim sakralnim slikarstvom. tvorca sveta koji gotovo postaje stvarnost jer u wemu nema niåeg ãto bi se pokazalo veãtaåkim. ali je bio svestan da je to u apsolutnom smislu nemoguñe i da je film ipak iluzija. ali da su retki trenutci u kojima reæiser uspe da postigne joã neko znaåewe. moæete jedino stvoriti wenu sliku“. odnosno. Reaktion Books. 71. To je izraæajnost koja je dovedena do takve preciznosti i lakonizma da prestaje da bude izraæajna.

señawe. ka subjektivnoj percepciji dogaœaja je ono ãto proæima sve wegove filmove. Realistiåne scene æivota sredwevekovne Rusije su u Rubqovu izmeãane sa scenama izmeœu sna i jave. realnog åoveka. Ogoqeni realizam dostupan qudskom oku za wega nije kraj priåe o onome ãto æeli da zabeleæi. likovi Tarkovskog mogu izgledati bezizraæajno dok se ne sagleda bogatstvo razliåitih pogleda uperenih na wih sa svih moguñih strana. takoœe. ãto je. Po Tarkovskom. ponovo. San. sneg u crkvi. Wega interesuje i druga. åak je za film Andrej Rubqov bio kritikovan zbog naturalizma pojedinih scena. kao ãto su let balonom. U wegovim slikama meãaju se naturalistiåko i numunozno. snova i maãte. Ili scene Ivanovih snova ili señawa nasuprot realistiånim slikama rata u Ivanovom detiwstvu. Donatas Banionis je govorio da se åesto oseñao kako prosto pozira. ali je na kraju. unutraãwa realnost. Trebalo bi da bude autentiåno jedinstven. . ruska Golgota. sve izgledalo drugaåije. svet onakav kakav je kad proœe kroz prizmu qudskog liånog doæivqaja. subjektivni svet misli i oseñawa. a ne glumi. svojstveno ikoni). duhovna dimenzija. Tarkovski je postavio temeqe i za tehnike upotrebqene u narednim filmovima. ali se na wemu ne zaustavqa. ali ne izraæajan. slike i narativa. Jedinstven. jedna od karakteristika ikone. javqawe mrtvog Teofana.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 15 æajnosti likova i alegorijskim zagonetkama. pogled ka unutra. Tarkovski insistira na realizmu. Vrhunac izraæajnosti jeste da bude na svom odgovarajuñem mestu. wegova nevidqiva. Kao i figure na ikoni. Reãavawe odnosa izmeœu ikone i filma. utisaka i raspoloæewa. Zanimqivo da se kod wega javqa i prisutnost istih likova na dva razliåita mesta u jednom istom neprekinutom kadru (ãto je. da gledalac ne primeti da on zapravo glumi. Marija i deca u sceni señawa u Nostalgiji ãto je postignuto jednostavnim pretråavawem glumaca sa jednog na drugo mesto kad izaœu iz kadra. glumac bi trebalo da prikaæe obiånog. u Andreju Rubqovu. na primer.

takoœe se mogu razumeti kao jedno poetsko sredstvo buduñi da podseñaju na poeziju. jambiåki pentametar.nostalghia. Smewivawe dugaåkog kadra i brze montaæe. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. Tarkovski upotrebqava i isprekidan i nepodudaran zvuk stvarajuñi tako auru „ontoloãke neodreœenosti“: “Åini se kao da sama Priroda poåiwe åudesno da govori. Tarkovski se seña da je dvadeset puta restruktuirao film pre nego ãto ga je zavrãio. N° 9 I u teoriji i u praksi Tarkovski je nastojao da se oslobodi logike linearnog narativa i pribliæi logici poezije. dok je Rubqov sniman u crno-beloj tehnici. http://www. a konfuzna i haotiåna simfonija wenog mrmqawa neprimetno prelazi u istinsku muziku. haiku poezija. Ipak. autor jednog eseja 9 Robert Bird. Boju je. najboqi primer nelinearnog narativa predstavqa film Ogledalo u kome je potpuno napuãten vremenski kontinuitet. koristio kao jako izraæajno sredstvo da prenese odreœeno raspoloæewe ili emociju. Uglavnom koristi ograniåenu paletu boja. åak monohtromnu. ãto je vidno u Stalkeru. Ivanovo detiwstvo je bio pravi skok u evoluciji ruskog filma svojom narativnom strukturom zasnovanoj na asocijativnim vezama i tananim prelazima izmeœu sna i jave. Andrea Trpin. odnosno varijacije u ritmu samog filma. wemu veoma draga. Pod pojmom poetskog u filmu nije podrazumevao teæwu ka lirizmu i romantici. a dogaœaji iz tri razliåita vremenska perioda prikazana izmeãano. takoœe. Auditivni pejzaæ filma kao da postoji paralelno sa vizuelnim i kao da dolazi sa nekog drugog mesta.16 Teoloãki åasopis. na primer.com .“9 Zvukovi kod Tarkovskog se neobjaãwivo pojavquju i nestaju åesto varajuñi uho i u pogledu svog izvora. veñ slagawe slika u procesu asocijacija kao ãto to åine pesnici. stvarawe slike raspoloæewa i atmosfere kako je to åinila.

a stranci unutra. London. Svako od tih prostora se razlikuje po osobenom vizuelnom naponu koji nastaje ukrãtawem pogleda kamere sa pogledima likova i gledalaca. koja se nikad do kraja ne razreãava. a ponekad se åini i da ga uzvraña. modernih hotela i ogoqenih hotelskih soba. potoci. Priroda – drveñe. Ipak. trava. sneg. Crkvu odlikuju åvrsti uspravni stubovi i neæni lukovi. moæe biti da se radi i o pravoslavnom etosu qubavi prema tvorevini kao daru Boæijem koji trpi posledice åovekovog pada i åeka da bude obnovqena u svoj svojoj lepoti u 10 11 Idem.) . Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. on je uvek liåan jer ga oblikuje qudski pogled. Kuña poseduje prozore kroz koje stanari gledaju napoqe. bare. åini da ono ãto je sasvim ugodno i celovito odjednom izgleda strano i zbuwujuñe. Snimajuñi Nostalgiju nije æeleo da je prikaæe turistiåki kroz najlepãa mesta i predele. kuña ili dom i crkva ili svetiliãte. Reaktion Books. ukazuje da wegova „upotreba dvosmislenog zvuka uvlaåi publiku u borbu. Kada je reå o prostoru Andreja Tarkovskog11. na ivici panteizma.je najåeãñe prikazana kao plodna i æiva.. veñ da da prikaz Italije kroz poglede svojih likova ãto je ukquåivalo i slike nepoznatih ruãevina. Nikada nije samo dekorativan ili informativan.10 Takav zvuk destabilizuje. . Prirodu predstavqa jednostavan tok koji upija qudski pogled. voda (kiãa. 51-69. Robert Bird. U wegovim filmovima dominiraju priroda. a wihovu postojanost remeti wihovo åesto neoåekivano pojavqivawe. postavi pitawe ontoloãke sigurnosti. kao ãto se filmski likovi bore sa sopstvenom sposobnoãñu da imaju veru“. Time Tarkovski otvara prostor gledaocu da zaviri u numinoznu stvarnost ili bar. 2008..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 17 na temu zvuka u filmovima Andreja Tarkovskog. da li da veruju u priåu.

dok je u Nostalgiji i Ærtvi pomalo zapostavqena da bi se Ærtva zavrãila scenom olistavawa suvog drveta kao simbolom ispuwene nade i procvetale vere. nakon Katasonikove smrti. Kasnije. bunker u jednom trenutku podseti na crkvu tokom liturgije. gotovo uvek prikazuje kao dañu na selu. a Ærtva kuñom koja nestaje u vatri. krstovi. U Stalkeru. U Ivanovom detiwstvu Ivan ulazi na vrata u kuñu koja je skoro potpuno uniãtena kao ãto åini i Domeniko u Nostalgiji. Kuñu. a svetiliãte s åuvenom Madonom del Parte na wenom poåetku. tatarsko razvaqivawe ulaza u crkvu i ulazak u wu na 12 13 Poslanica Rimqanima 8.22. oltar sa hlebom. Na samom poåetku seqak Jefim i wegov skok sa vrha crkve. U Solarisu i Ærtvi ona je i mesto nerazreãenih porodiånih tenzija. a zanimqivo je da unutraãwost kuñe åesto ostaje neodrediva kao da prostorije mewaju svoj poloæaj. Rim. Kolin razbija tu atmosferu besnim zvowewem zvona. priroda je zagaœena i nepredvidiva. crkva belih zidova koja åeka da bude oslikana. zvono. Nostalgija zavrãava kuñom u nestvarnom pejzaæu unutar katedrale. prosuto mleko. N° 9 punoñi („Jer æarkim iãåekivawem tvorevimna oåekuje da se jave sinovi Boæiji“ da bi se „oslobodila od robovawa propadqivosti“)12 Wegova priroda je gotovo slovesna. ona kao da vidi. åipka. Andrej Rubqov obiluje predstavama crkvi. kwige. U Ogledalu i Nostalgiji ona se javqa samo u snovima punim åeæwe za povratkom u dom. Katedrala u nadrealnom pejzaæu koji podseña na De Kirikove slike pojavquje se na kraju Nostalgije. Tarkovski. simbolom novog æivota. dolazi do izvesne promene. plamen. Kolin u crkvi pali cigaretu izmeœu ostataka freske Bogorodice i razbuktalog plamena. razume. sastradava i raduje se zajedno sa åovekom („Jer znamo da sva tvar zajedno uzdiãe i tuguje do sada“)13. . Åesti motivi u kuñi su åaãe. U Ivanovom detiwstvu. 21. 8.18 Teoloãki åasopis.

iscequje. iznad svega. otuœenosti i zajedniãtva. Zato je i video izvesnu religioznu dimenziju same umetnosti. zaãto åovek æivi i koji je smisao wegovog postojawa. Ciq umetnosti je da kroz potres i katarzu uåini qudsku duãu prijemåivom za dobro i da joj priliku za jedno autentiåno duãevno iskustvo. Umetnik mora da teæi istini i ma koliko ta istina bila straãna. po wemu imao posebnu misiju i posebnu odgovornost. a sam umetnik je. Tarkovski je smatrao da postoji analogija izmeœu potresa izazvanog umetniåkim delom i onog koje potiåe iz åisto religioznog iskustva. jeste da napravi bar jedan korak ka duhovnom savrãenstvu. koji ne æeli – ili åak ne moæe – da pristane na opãte prihvañenu svetsku ‘moralnost’. stradawa i zla. instrument wegovog saznavawa. a ono bar da se upita i da drugima postavi pitawe. op. putuju u nepoznate svetove svog unutraãweg biña. Ako ne da objasni. cit. po wemu. ona ipak. tako da najmawe ãto åovek moæe da uradi tokom svog æivota.14 Umetnost se. za istinskim postojawem. za izmirewem. kako sebi tako i onima oko sebe. Tarkovski piãe: „Mene privlaåi åovek koji je spreman da sluæi viãem ciqu. i crkva kao mesto epifanije – Teofanovo javqawe sa onoga sveta. . onaj koji vodi duhovnom 14 Andrej Tarkovski. Muåe ih pitawa vere i smisla. jedini drugi put je. iskupqewa i ærtve. Jer. åovek koji prepoznaje da smisao qudskog postojawa leæi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 19 kowima. raœa i utvrœuje tamo gde postoji nezasita åeæwa za duhovnim kao idealom. Wegovi junaci su najåeãñe oni koji tragaju. ukquåen u putawu åovekovog kretawa prema onom ãto nazivamo apsolutnom istinom“. u borbi protiv zla u nama samima. ciq celokupne umetnosti je da objasni. „Umetnost je sredstvo pripajawa sveta åoveku. padova i pokajawa. Liãena duhovnosti umetnost odgaja u sebi svoju vlastitu tragediju. Za Tarkovskog. na æalost. åeznu za Biñem.

16 Kao dubok i odgovoran umetnik. one koji na taj poziv odgovore. op. govorio je.. istanåanim oseñajem za upotrebu formalnih elemenata filma i narativa. N° 9 propadawu.20 Teoloãki åasopis. Ono ãto sawa i ono åemu se nada... Andrej Tarkovski. åini autorom koji istanåano i s merom gradi duhovnu dimenziju filma. sami u wu zarone i suoåe se sa sobom i sa onostranim. „nadu. Za wega su svet i åovek neizrecive tajne i on svoje gledaoce. boæansko. Stil Andreja Tarkovskog religiozni diskurs ne objavquje i ne natura. uzvodi ka jednom neizrecivom i mistiånom iskustvu. åesto uprkos greãnosti samog pesnika“.. veru qubav. transcendentno. po naãem miãqewu.“15 Wegovi likovi su zaokupqeni sopstvenim duhovnim krizama. uzvodi do samih vrata te tajne ostavqajuñi ih da poput Stalkera. molitvu. „Umetnost potvrœuje ono najboqe u åoveku“. op. rvawem sa æivotom i wegovim smislom te su tako wegovi filmovi i svojim narativom upleteni u reãavawe neizreciva tajne postojawa ulazeñi tako u prostor duhovnog i religioznog.. a naãe svakodnevno iskustvo i sveopãti pritisak da se povinujemo åini izbor ovog drugog puta isuviãe lakim. unutraãwim tragawima. 206. Kada je neko ko ne zna da pliva baåen u vodu. ãto ga. veñ samo nenametqivo poziva na susret i opãtewe i. cit. Umetnik je takoœe upravqen nekom vrstom nagona i wegovo delo produæava tragawe åoveka za onim ãto je veåno. cit. Andrej Tarkovski je na ekran umeãno prenosio duboko proæivqenu istinu åovekovog postojawa u ovom svetu dotiåuñi se i wegove duhovne dimenzije.. nagon govori wegovom telu koji pokret ñe ga spasiti. 15 16 Andrej Tarkovski. 237 .

Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. Tarkovska.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 21 Citirana dela: Bird. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. http://www. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). Robert.nostalghia. http://www. (prireœ. Novi Sad. Robert. 2008. Umetniåka druæina Anonim.nostalghia. Prometej. Wishard. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Beograd. London. Reaktion Books. Bird. Andrej. David.com . Vajawe u vremenu. Marina.com Tarkovski. 1999.). 1989.

N° 9 Resume Andrei Tarkovsky was a director who created his films with desire to penetrate deeply into the secret of human existence and give his audience the opportunity for an authentic spiritual experience. but through subtle suggestions and hints in order to give an opportunity to his audience to make an effort to catch a glimpse of the invisible realities by themselves. His main effort was to catch the essence of life in all its dimensions. Tarkovsky tended to free his films from the logic of linear narratives. The spiritual dimension of his films is not established on religious narrative. .22 Teoloãki åasopis. presenting the invisible without useless describing and retelling. but on skillful use of basic elements of film. emotional expressiveness of characters and allegorical constructions (though he was often criticized as too allegorical) showing strong influence of orthodox iconography and its esthetic means.

wegovih uåewa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 23 UDK 281.02. do krize razdvojenosti i ãizofrenije izmeœu Liturgije. zacementirana Liturgija. Univerzitet u Beogradu) (nesic. tj. bogoslovqa i crkvene poboænosti.lazar@gmail.2010 Lazar Neãiñ. za eshatoloãku Evharistiju.96:252 Primljeno 19. Kroz krizu savremenog pravoslavnog bogoslovqa u Srbiji i ãire. zatvorenost za „drugaåijost“. a samim tim i preutemeqenu pastirsku sluæbu Crkve. bogoslovqa kao i samih hriãñana za uvek – novog i neponovqivog Gospoda Isusa Hrista. itd. . Liturgije. (Pravoslavni bogoslovski fakultet.01. i daje jedan ãiroki moguñi naåin da se oni prevaziœu ili makar poånu da se prevazilaze i to pomoñu koncepta „dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. otvorenosti Crkve. pojmova i savremenih interpretacija. relevantno i aktuelno bogoslovqe Crkve. romantiåno – epski jezik Pravoslavqa. Tekst dijagnosticira taåke u kojima se takve anomalije pojavquju: nerelevantno bogoslovqe.2010 Prihvañeno: 23.com) Savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve Rezime Priloæeni tekst predstavqa pokuãaj analize savremenog stawa „pastirske sluæbe pravoslavne Crkve“ i to pre svega iz pravoslavno – bogoslovskog i kritiåkog ugla.

sveta. i qubav – Boæiju stalno – primajuñe. Bogoslovqe je upitanost. izreka i poslovica o Bogu pothrawenih u muzejskoj zbirci Crkve koje åuåe u fasciklama na policama kabineta i åekaju da budu izvaœene u trenucima kada „ i Crkva treba da kaæe svoje“?! Ili je bogoslovqe neãto drugo. definicija. æivota. doæivqaja. „ispravnost“ naãih stavova. riziåno – bezdano. Da li je bogoslovqe tu da „osigura“ naãu poboænost. neãto mnogo „drugaåije“ od svega ãto smo dosada åuli o wemu?! Bogoslovqe svagda jeste opis. uvek – neponovqivo sazreva. veåito epikleptiåko . „ortodoksnost“ naãe hriãñanske pravovernosti pred „bezboænim svetom“. neki susret moæda? Jedno neponovqivo otkrivawe „drugosti“ Boga. deãava. iskaza. Bogoslovqe se zbiva. „opravdawe“ za crkvenu samoizolaciju? Ili je bogoslovqe neãto „drugo“. dakle. otkrivawe neotkrivenog. pre svega. Bogoslovqe. . uvek – iznova – okuãano. Bogoslovqe je nikad – do – kraja – ispriåana priåa o onima koji se qube. niti „definicija Boga“.. opitno. Bogoslovqe je.. niti iãta ãto potseña na neãto dato i zavrãeno. N° 9 1. suæivota. veåno – biñevno – otkrivajuñe. qubavi izmeœu Svete Trojice i åoveka. pokuãaj neopisivog opisa susreta. jedno integralno obuhvatawe svih åovekovih razmiãqawa. moguñnost nemoguñeg. Zacementirano.24 Teoloãki åasopis. prizivajuñe. dogaœa. åoveka.Bogoslovqe i pastirska sluæba Crkve u XXI veku Sredstva pojmovnog miãqewa su suviãe siromaãna da bi izrazila veånu beskonaånost Emil Sioran Ãta je bogoslovqe? Ãta bi moglo da bude bogoslovqe? Da li je to skup sistema. nije samo klasiåan „govor i nauk o Boæanstvu“.

sa jednom velikom razlikom. i to posebno kada znamo da danas i nije baã sve tako jednostavno i lako. ãto je danas zakon postojawa. Bogoslovqe nema sve odgovore na sva pitawa. bezdan neotkriveni. Bogoslovqe „nema gde glavu prikloniti“.2 Pogreãno je uverewe o bogoslovqu kao åuvaru „Boæijih zakona“. Bogoslovqe je ono evharistijski – epikleptiåko i qubavno – åeæwivo nadajuñe – se – iãåekivawe i neumoqivi vapaj: „Doœi Gospode“!3 Bogoslovqe je uznemiravawe onog nekrofilskog. Ali. „Sveti Oci su odgovorili na sva pitawa“. Bogoslovqe je rizik. „pravoslavnih vrednosti i obiåaja“. pruæiñe nam moæda iznenaœujuñi uvid u ovu åiwenicu prevashodnosti Dolaska Carstva nad osiguravawem druãtveno-politiåkog æivota. mewa obiåaje. ni u bogoslovqu ni u æivotu. itd. patriotizma. konvencionalnog i nominalnog „hriãñanstva“ samodovoqnog od svojih „dostignuña“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 25 Bogoslovqe nije odgovor na „dilemu Boga“! Bogoslovqe je i samo u dugaåkom redu nauka koje „muåi Bog“. Jedinom moguñnoãñu koja nam je joã ostala u savremenom svetu. jer se ono bavi Onim koji krãi zakone. u samosigurnosti. „porodice“. naæalost. zapisa. rizikujuñi sve do samog svog biña. Jedinom „misijom“ koju Crkva moæe danas pruæiti. jer se ono time ni ne bavi. 46 2 Treba iznova promisliti stare fraze prema kojima: „Vera ima odgovore na sva pitawa“. åekaju da vide ishod borbe bogoslovqa i Onoga koga bogoslovqe treba. Razlikom liånog qubavnog susreta! Razlikom onog Jevanœelskog: „Doœi i vidi“1. „tradicije“. samo bogoslovqe se baca u bezdan moguñnosti. „U Pismu su svi odgovori“. ali i moguñnost tragiånog neodnosa sa „drugima“. Dok ostale nauke sa distance. .. tekstova. itd. „druãtvenih i veånih vrednosti“. tradicije. 3 Temeqno istraæivawe ranih hriãñanskih molitvi.. moguñnost gledawa „drugih“. uvodi 1 Jn 1.

Pastirska sluæba Crkve predstavqa tek jedan „uvod“ kojim se åovek uspravqa i upuãta u taj rizik odnosa. Bogoslovqe je zato i tragiåno. a sve u prostoru „novog æivota“. ono ãto iskamo. za åim åeznemo.ali to je tek poåetak. a ne kao „svagda – neponovqivo – novo“. neoåekivano – novo. itd. sigurnosti i statistike (tipa: koliko sam postio. saborskih.. dogaœajno – novo.. novost. nego kao od-smrti-izbavqenog i ne-viãe-u-smrti-okonåavajuñeg. Ono se ne moæe sastojati samo iz „utemequjuñih tekstova“ (svetopisamskih. u to „rvawe sa Bogom“. itd. 1 – 14 5 Ali opet.). ne novog kao modno-zanimqivog. Novo je ono ãto dolazi. istorijskih. leåi. otaåkih. N° 9 haos u harmoniju. to tek iznova treba promisliti i proæiveti. kao jedan preævakani i nerealni termin u koji i sami malo verujemo. åemu se nadamo.. . jer ne pruæa farisejsku sladuwavost morala. kul. veåno – novo. Ona osposobqava. Hrista. koliko åesto smo svedoci da dotiånu reå „novo“ shvatamo samo u hronoloãko – istorijskom kontekstu. dolazeñe – novo. itd. tj. molio se. in. novo je samo ono istinsko uvek – novo. jer ubija svako naãe sebence. bogosluæbenih. svagda – novo. dakle novo kao iãåekujuñe – nadawe i stalno – prizivajuñe – primawe Onog Novog. tj. u Crkvi5. neponovqivo – novo. Koliko puta samo koristimo kovanicu „novi æivot“ kao obiånu. 21 – 44. kao „jednom – davno – novo“. Bogoslovqe je uvek novo! Ali. Mora takoœe biti jasno kako produæiti ono ãto su „utemequjuñi“ tekstovi 4 Mt 5. Koji gazi po smeñu logike ovog sveta4. problema i moguñih razjaãwewa. Bogoslovska misao zahteva otvoreni horizont tema. davao milostiwu – toliko ñe mi se vratiti u svetu gde pobeœuje idealna bezpristrasna pravda). fensi. trendi. Novina. Ãta zapravo znaåi „novi æivot“. mrtvu floskulu. tj. Jedinog Novog.26 Teoloãki åasopis. ono ãto prizivamo. Jn 1. ãto åekamo.

Zato ona treba da bude osloboœena svakog kopirawa u korist interpretacije. starih hriãñanskih tekstualnih svedoåanstva. u naãem sebiånom xepu. otaåke proãlosti. s jedne strane i tragiku savremenog æivota.. Da li se analogno isto to deãava i onom bogoslovqu koje nema snage da svari „teæinu i ozbiqnost“. „obiåajima i starim praksama“. ali daleke. ono nas na jedan divan i smireni naåin liãava moguñnosti da ga dræimo u nekim naãim „riznicama bogoslovqa“. Ono nas liãava samodopadne sigurnosti. æivotnost. „predawima“. Samo iz tog Tamo – eshatoloãkog mi ga moæemo prizvati. itd. idr. viãe je nego opasno. ujeziåavati.. Pisma. udomqeno na Drugom Mestu. Bivajuñi uvek Tamo. Bogoslovqe nije samo „tumaåewe“ Svetih Otaca. u ãta se zapravo danas åesto pretvara kao u jedno „areheologisawe“ po tekstualnim iskopinama slavne.. ustvari postaje pravi otrov za telo i polako ga usmrñuje. ali koja se dobro „ne vari“. i to one liåno – hermeneutiåke. ne funkcioniãe. muåeniãtvom. na polici sebequbqa kao kakav lek protiv neistomiãqenika. ne prima. Bogoslovqe je uvek Tamo. ma koliko dobra i koristna bila.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 27 uåinili6. Mestu koje je Carstvo Boæije. Imajmo u vidu da ni sami sveti oci nisu odgovorili na sva pitawa!!! . tekstova. Mestu koje je nadnacionalno i nadteritorijalno. praviti. iskustvom. a pritom nemati potrebu za prizivajuñim – oæivaqavawem istih. Poloæiti svoju nadu jedino u ispravnost istorijskih tekstova na kojima poåiva danaãwe hriãñanstvo. (Poznato je da hrana. itd. æivim susretom. Mestu koje je Tamo. askezom. tj. Ono nas liãava uspavanosti. buduñi da se u – nesigurnosti 6 Npr. s druge strane? Da li takvo bogoslovqe polako eutanizira savremeno hriãñanstvo?) Bogoslovqe je hermeneutika susreta izmeœu Svete Trojice i Åoveka. buduñi uvek nepotpuno – prisutno i iznova – oprisutnujuñe. kovawem novih reåi. Evharistijom. hermeneutika uniãtewa smrti. Mestu koje se neprestano – gradi i Koje iznova ikoniãe i ono ãto zovemo Crkva.

Mesto na kome je „sve neãto drugo“. to je parodija istine. u Liturgiju. nespremnoãñu. Priåeãña. u Crkvu i za Crkvu i Crkvi. tj. æivotom qubavi i ærtve.. Mesto izbavqewa prostora i vremena od veånog neprisustva biña. nije åak ni zanimqiva misao. tj. molitvom. Hristov æivot u nama. tj. najæivotnijeg. Mesto zajedniåkog spaãavawa sveta i biña od smrti. Bogoslovqe se „mesi“7 i unosi tamo gde mu je i mesto.. zapitanosti. postom. str. poredak. najistinitijeg sjediwewa sa Wim. tragawe. onaj Dogaœaj Dolaska Drugog koji jedini moæe da ga donese Ovde. æivota koji se „pre groba veñ nalazi u Vaskrsewu9“.28 Teoloãki åasopis. Liturgija je najprirodnije Mesto na kome i u kome se odigrava Dogaœaj Dolazak Drugog. Lestviånik. To je Mesto razgovora. mesto koje poraœa novo biñe æivota. savetovawa. svim onim ãto zovemo askeza ili podvig. 384). najbitnijeg. N° 9 – vapi za wim i u – besmislu – svakodnevnice – traæi ono Tamo. osluãkivawa. „jeretiåno“ åak. u koje åesto upadamo8. Neliturgijsko bogoslovqe. Pokuãavajuñi da pravdawima. gresima. ono Neoåekivano. plaãeñi se da ñe nam moæda saopãtiti neãto neoåekivano. 1998: 45 9 . 7 8 Pokajawem. nepokajawem.Aleksandra Ãmemana: „ Jer Sveta Tajna jeste eshatoloãka i kao takva se ne uklapa u ‘naåine æivota’. Evharistija i bogoslovqe u taj ‘naåin æivota’ unose probleme. od onog straãnog iskustva neprisutnosti Drugog. forsirawem „pravoslavnog naåina æivota“ (!) „zaobiœemo“ susret sa Drugim. tragizam. zakone i „pravoslavnost naãeg naåina æivota“. ono Drugo. Setimo se samo o. neãto od åega bi morali da mewamo naãu zacementiranu ispravnost. dijaloga. pre svega u Dogaœaju najerosnijeg. borbu-oni sve vreme ugroæavaju statiånost ‘naåina æivota’ (citat preuzet iz: Naã æivot u Hristu.

tj. buduñi do Dolaska Drugog Tamo kao veñ . . Bogoslovqe je blagodarewe. Æivota koji Dolazi. bivajuñi liturgijsko i epikleptiåko. poklawa. biñe nadahnuta. ãta sve ove reåi i izrazi nama danas znaåe? Ãta åoveku 21. kao i celini rada. koji neprestano iznova Dolazi. veka one govore. samo obiåne reåi. Darovawe buduñeg æivota. proæeta.Kriza pojmova – kritiåki pristup nadahnut „personalistiåkom ontologijom“ Nisu dovoqne reåi. ono „Drugo“. EKV Sva naãa promiãqawa u ovom poglavqu. takoœe i Dar10.prisutno neponovqivo – neoåekivano . takoœe apsolutnog dara. Ali. Novi i neprestani Dar qubavi i slobode kojim se grobovi prazne od smrti. Novo Jelo i novo Piñe. osmiãqena „otvorenoãñu Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. i onim istim „Dolaskom Jedinog 10 Æak Derida ( Jacques Derrida ) ñe opisati ekonomiju dara kao naåin razmene gde se namiruje raåun: dar je uistinu dar onda kada se poklawa bez oåekivawa da se uzvrati.sasvim Ovde. daruje. „Nova Tvar“.sada ali ne . Blagodarewe Onome Kome mi jedino to i moæemo. hermeneutiãu? 2.oprisutwewe „slatke“ Hrane i Piña besmrtnosti. iznenaœuje davawem. saopãtavaju.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 29 Bogoslovqe je. i bez duga koji prethodi. Da blagodarimo.. koji dolazeñi – donosi. Trpeza Carstva koje je veñ . ili dara bez kalkulacije.. Deridina teorija dara kao da nastoji da se pribliæi tajni Hristove ærtve. da me vrate u æivot.

naziva. Takoœe. Bogoslovqe je previãe zarobqeno u svoj istorijski jezik. Jedinorodni. za nas. naåin postojawa. stvarawe sveta iz niåega. post. Dolazeñeg. . imena. mora da bude iskrena sama sa sobom i u najboqem asketsko – otaåkom i jevanœelskom duhu. Donoseñeg -Neoåekivanog i Buduñeg. otaåkog. npr: • Stari pojmovi priliåe vremenu kada su nastali: Kako objasniti sebi i svetu pojmove poput: jednosuãtnost. Evharistija. pravoslavnog hriãñansva je viãe nego za pohvalu. i ostale „temeqne“ pojmove hriãñanskog uåewa? • Usahle forme crkvenog æivota ne mogu se analagno lepiti na savremenost: Æeqa za ãto autentiånijim æivqewem ranog. predawskog. Carstvo Boæije. kenoza. logosi biña. tj. Teologija i Jezik. seña li se neko joã ãta je to Sveta Trojica? Ãta nama danas znaåe Crkva. crkvena terminologija iz proãlosti vredna areheoloãkog prouåavawa. imenica. danas Gospod Isus Hristos. Beograd. pa tek onda da ukaæe na brvna i u ostalim oåima. Ovo je naã hermeneutiåki kquå kojim pokuãavamo da otvorimo vrata problema. prvo da „izvadi brvno iz oka svoga“. naivne bajke? Ãta moæe savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve danas sa svim ovim hitnim pitawima? Pre svega. æivot veåni. molitva. Pogledajmo kakav je jezik bogoslovqa danas11.30 Teoloãki åasopis. 1998. ipostas. ãta danas znaåi reå Bog. ali samo pod uslovom onog veñ mnogo puta ovde ponovqenog „osmiãqavajuñeg – prizivawa“ Novog. reåi. duhovnost. N° 9 Novog i Drugog. nerazdeqivost prirode. spasewe. Hrista“. Hriãñanska misao. ikonomija. æeqa za ãto „monaãkijim i manastirskijim“ naåinima åekawa Dolaska 11 Sjajna studija za razmatrawe ovog problema: Stilijan Papadopulos. Ko je. Vaskrsewe. idioma i ostalog? Jesu li ovo samo stare reåi. podvig? Ãta nama predstavqa åitava enciklopedija hriãñanskih termina.

Rijeka. „religijsko“. Strah bogoslovqa da se suoåi sa savremenim „bezboænostima“ pod izgovorom romantiånog bavqewa evharistijom. mi zapadamo u oåitu nerelevantnost pred svetom. police. Hristom. muzeje. „umetniåko – vrednosno“. mi smo posebnu paæwu poklonili mislima zapadnog teologa Jirgena Moltmana ( Jurgen Moltmann ) u wegovoj åuvenoj kwizi „Raspeti Bog“ ( Ex Libris. dehumanizacije u nauci. „druãtveno – politiåki – prilagodqivo“. koncertne dvorane. problema. Strah od sveta. odnosno tamo gde je ono „neproblematiåno“. • Problemi sa kojima se bogoslovqe suoåava su bezvremeni i nerelevantni danas: Veñ pomenuto bavqewe „istorijom bogoslovqa“ tj. tj. i to onim mestima gde se govori o neidentitetu i nerelevantnosti savremenog hriãñanstva ( iz ovih misli pravoslavni bi mnogo mogli da nauåe). a posebno sa onim sasvim Drugim. Iako je istraæivawe starih problema neophodno. biñe dovoqni i naåini da se u qudsku i æivotnu svakodnevnicu udahne sveæ vazduh Onoga Koji „diãe gde hoñe“. ipak. tj. 12 . idr. 2008. za obiåan svet koji ostaje van tog supermen molitvenog prostora. „istoriåno – nacionalno“. ) . ono ipak danas ne moæe da bude primarno. Do tada. mrtvo!12 Hrabro suoåavawe sa rugobama ovog sveta tek predstoji. „Boæijom pravdom i promislom“ i zatvarawem u iste (jer se u takvim apstrakcijima jedino oseña sigurnim). problemima koji su nekada davno bili aktuelni i vaœewem istih na povrãinu savremenosti. galerije. nakaznosti åovekove svakodnevnice. U hriãñansko – Iako postoji obiqe literature za ovaj problem. tj. eshatologijom. bacaju ga u fioke. „zanimqivo“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 31 Hristovog takoœe moæe imati svoju zdravu primenu samo pod uslovima da „nekako“ iznaœemo naåina da ceo svet strpamo u manastire i peñine. vode bogoslovqe. isti je onom strahu od susreta sa drugim – bliæwim.

32 Teoloãki åasopis. O gramatologiji. Naãe bogoslovqe je. tj. arheoloãka iskopina koja u sebi åuva tek samo trag13 nekadaãweg – davnog odnosa sa Bogom. jedan muzejski eksponat kome se jedni dive. 13 Za pojam „traga“ u savremenoj filosofiji videti: Æak Derida. istorija razvoja teoloãke misli. Ona je. Sarajevo. Veselin Masleãa. Jezik savremenog bogoslovqa. • Govor o Bogu. 2008. . tj. samo jedan „objekt“ u rukama areheologa teologije. samo jedna „istorija teologije“ tj. danas. Sarajevo. Ãahin Paãiñ. jezika koji – ne – dopire – dodrugog Tek ovaj problem iziskuje jednu celu studiju. za koju naæalost ovde nemamo prostora. åoveku. drugi ga preziru. svetu odvija se u okviru nekada – davnog – arhaiånog jezika. terminologije i problema. ali jedno je sigurno: jezik bogoslovqa u krizi prebiva. . ali obostrano åuvaju daleko od stvarnog æivota. N° 9 pravoslavnom taboru takvog viteza – borca joã uvek åekamo da se pojavi. tj. ali i hriãñanstva. koje se nalazi „pre licem sveta“ najåeãñe je: • Onaj – koji – viãe – ne – dotiåe – svet • Onaj – koji – u – istoriji – prebiva • Zakopan – u – riznici – señawa • Onaj – koji – se – samo – seña – davnine • Sahrawen – u – kwigama • Zatrpan objektivacijama • Romantiåno – bajkovit • Epski – naivan Malo je prostora na kome bismo daqe mogli razraœivati ove postavke. Pisawe i razlika. u stvari. jedna recipirana istorija teologisawa.

Sluæiti Liturgiju. italijanski filosof i teoretiåar. ali ne –joã . Indiana University Press. Zone Books. dolazi i naãe preispitivawe: „Åemu joã bogoslovqe“?.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 33 Bogoslovqe. podviga. nemoñi. kao kretajuñe – se – ka – nama. i ostale „duhovne“ radwe åiniti. dovode nas u pitawe pred reåima Hristovim: „O eurwn thn yuchn auton apolesei autin. 39) 18 . dotiåe se ovih tema u svom genijalnom radu “Remnants of Auschwitz”. pokreñe iznova ovu temu u svojoj najnovijoj kwizi: “ The Weakness of God – Theology of Event”. itd. 16 17 Œorœo Agamben ( Giorgio Agamben ). kao osmiãqavajuñi – od –Tamo – nas – Ovde. odsustva smisla. kretawem. ameriåki filosof religije. eshatoloãko – evharistijsko bogoslovqe samim svojim naporom. glavni je predstavnik ove misli. Na staro pitawe: „Åemu joã filosofija“?. 15 Œani Vatimo (Giani Vattimo). Naivno shvañenog kao: „mi sluæimo Liturgiju“ i „molitve i posta“. danas. 2008. italijanski filozof i profesor na Torinskom univerzitetu. svetu „posle Auãvica17“?! Bogoslovqe stalno prebiva u opasnosti od eshatoloãko – evharistijskog utopizma. izvijawem napred i naviãe (dakle kao svo u kretawu i 14 Reå-kovanica za åitav jedan sistem åovekove misli posle objave „smrti Boga“. Svetu i bliæwem. New York. ozbiqnosti. videti u: Kopiñ. liãavajuñi sadaãwost dinamike. odgovornosti. kai apolesas thn yuchn autou eneken emou eurnsei authn “ (Mt 10. rada. moliti se i postiti. 2008: 5 . Xon Kaputo (John Caputo). 1999.10. ima prizvuk nelagodnosti u svetu zalivenog nihilizmom. Upravo kao veñ – sada . kao stalno – dolazeñe. i to u ovom svetu post – metafizike14 na temeqima slabe ontologije15 i Boæije slabosti16.18 Setimo se da svaka utopija tovari obaveze na buduñnost. bez aktivne qubavi prema Hristu.

.net/. hriãñanska. Hrista. Bogoslovqe se. u kojoj taj isti jezik postaje mrtav za svoju svetu – se – obrañati upotrebu. O Teopoetici viãe videti na internet prezentaciji: http://theopoetics. moæda jedan meta – jezik?. zagrqaj. itd. 19 Ratzinger. sasvim Drugog. polako pretvara ( ili se veñ pretvorilo? ) u jezik nemuãtih bogoslovskih unutraãwih trvewa.19 Da li bogoslovqe zato potrebuje jedan novi jezik. i mi pravoslavni ne smemo hladno zaobiñi postojawe jedne takve zanimqive i originalne misli. gledawe. ona ostaje izvorno svetopisamska. veñ jedan jezik svakodnevnice. tj. slikarstvo. Poznate i razumqivo – shvatqive (srcu prijemåqive i umu osvetqavajuñe) reåi. ne smemo zaboraviti ni kolosalnu misao rimokatoliåkog teologa Hans Urs von . idr. tj. poput: susret. pretvara se u jedan „klovnovski jezik“. unapred åuva sebe od pasivno – nepokretne neistine romantiåarskog eshatoloãko evharistijskog utopizma. Iako svoje izvore crpi u drugim oblastima qudskog stvaralaãtva. 1984: 5. dakle. a to je opet i opet susret Svete Trojice i Åoveka20. muzika. S druge strane. ovde preobraæene. jedan jezik – susret. mogu ponovo pronañi mesta u opisu onog dogaœaja o kome bogoslovqe blagovesti. ali u okvirima svima-razumqivog i saopãtivog jezika svakodnevnog i sveopãteg qudskog æivota i iskustva. ispuwene i ujeziåene dogaœajem dolaska Drugog. kwiæevnost. film.ali ne u smislu ponovne pojmovno – logiåke ograniåenosti i nemoguñnosti za izraæavawe onog liåno – qubavnog. N° 9 razrastawu). 20 Veoma zanimqiva misao za pravoslavno bogoslovqe danas. moæe biti pokret hriãñanske teologije na Zapadu. qubqewe. nemajuñi „dah novog æivota“. dodir. Teopoetika je i nama danas poziv na jedno takvo saopãtavawe sebe svetu. poezija. npr. crkvena.. jer predstavqa pokuãaj onog istog neizrecivog iskaza i opisa susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka.34 Teoloãki åasopis. nazvan Teopoetika (Theopoethics).

u tom deãavawu. Bogoslovqe je jedno jeziåko pounutrewe opisa susreta izmeœu Onog sasvim Drugog. a ne zaokruæuje istinu. Hrista.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 35 Na mesto „mrtvog jezika“ treba doñi „jezik susreta“. dolazimo do neizbeæne åiwenice i pitawa ãta sve od toga bogoslovqe nije. tj. tj. on se gradi. tj. on ne postoji pre susreta. Svete Trojice i onog bez – ontoloãkog – temeqa – trenutno – ovde – prisutnog. jezik koji ne postoji van Drugog. da ga odvede u krizu? Oslawajuñi se. i samim tim dovede do jednog diskutabilnog naåina æivota u savremenoj crkvenosti. tj. Koji donoseñi konstituiãe za moguñnost razgovora. . ili u ãta sve bogoslovqe moæe da se pretvori.Kriza crkvenog æivota (kratak pregled) U pokuãaju da odgovorimo na teãko pitawe ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude (u svetlu autentiånog crkvenog. on nastaje u osluãkivawu Duha koji dolazi. koje Ja ima tek sa Ti. s jedne strane. na misao savremenih bogoslova Crkve. tj. poput Aleksandra Ãmemana (delimiåno se Baltazara (Hans Urs von Balthasar) i wegov projekat Teologike (Theologik). Jezik bogoslovqa je jezik dijaloga.. Ja Crkve je potpuno „bezjeziåno“ bez Ti Drugog. i pokuãaja da daqe razradimo probleme koje smo gore naveli. 3. u ãta sve moæe da mutira i pseudomorfira (kada ono nije obasjano svetlom autentiånosti pomenutog). monolog bogoslovskog jezika je smrt istog. evharistijskog i qubavno – slobodnog hriãñanskog æivota koji „zastupa“ personalistiåka ontologija). Taj jezik mora iznova da najavquje. Teodrame (Theodramatik) i Teoloãke estetike (Theologische Ästhetik).. Åoveka. Wegova prava upotreba æivi jedino u tom dogaœaju.

Ali. razmatrano i moæe se nañi u mnogobrojnoj literaturi koja je svima dostupna22. jedna od najtragiånijih posledica krize jeste organsko razdvajawe bogoslovqa od evharistije i poboænosti. naravno ne pretendujuñi da zaokruæimo sistem i zakquåimo problem. promislimo. pritom åvrsto se dræeñi smernica i puteva ãto su ih savremeni pravoslavni bogoslovi (a posebno ovde aktuelna „personalistiåka ontologija“ mitropolita Zizjulasa ) odredili i dijagnosticirali. o tome je veñ mnogo toga reåeno.36 Teoloãki åasopis. J. A. i dr. kako. 22 Radovi savremenih nam bogoslova: G. a s druge na samo liåno iskustvo naãeg parohijskog crkvenog æivota. Majendorfa. Ovde ñemo postaviti 21 Ãmeman.. napisano. izbegavajuñi preteranu samodopadnost i kritiku. H. Åoveka. Mi æelimo da proãirimo vidik ovog problema. i ko je uzroånik krize. pokuãañemo da dijagnosticiramo gde. Pre svega. N° 9 koristeñi wegovom razradom problema u okvirima ãeme Liturgija – Bogoslovqe – Poboænost). Ãmemana. . bogoslovqe danas teãko dopire do uãiju sveta. idr. Afanasjeva. a) Bogoslovqe – Liturgija – Poboænost Na predhodnim stranama smo pouãali da osvetlimo problem onoga ãto smo nazvali „ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude“. i to najviãe iz liånog iskustva. tj. rastegnemo. nama je interesantan problem „neaktuelnosti bogoslovqa za savremeni svet“. iznutra doæivimo i shvatimo. N. Pre svega. Joã tragiånije i paradoksalnije je ãto ono ne dopire ni do uãiju samih „bogoslova“ i hriãñana. od Crkve kao „zajednice svetih i zajednice u svetiwi“21. kada. savremenog druãtva. I ne samo to. Janarasa. Georgorija Florovskog. veñ da ga uz pomoñ pomenute „otvorenosti Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“ joã viãe proãirimo. 2008: 21. Hristosa Janarasa. Florovskog. Rekli smo veñ da zarobqeno u svoj arhaiåni jezik. Iz tog ugla moæemo i uoåiti wegove danaãwe nedostatke.

o zanemarivawu SAMOG ÆIVOTA HRIÃÑANINA kao glavnom izvoru za bogoslovqe. postajuñi glavna „inspiracija“ za susret sa Svetom Trojicom. posebno od evharistije kao „glavnog izvora“23. I joã: koliko moæemo susresti Svetu Trojicu u kwigama. itd. istinitijeg i veñeg izvora bogoslovstvovawa od samog æivota neke liånosti i same Crkve i problema koje æivot donosi pred æivot svake liånosti posebno. pravoslavqe. Odvojeno od svojih izvora. kao: spasewe. a o kojoj skoro da nema pomena u savremenoj pravoslavnoj bogoslovskoj misli. 2008: 511 – 519. Crkva. vaskrsewe. a koliko u æivom sustretu. qubavnom. molitva. duhovnost. Hristos. na Svetoj Gori Atonskoj! . ãta sa sobom danas nose? Da li i daqe imaju svoju samorazumqivu. igumana manastira Iviron. smisao? Naã odgovor je: ne. Pitamo se: ima li znaåajnijeg. konvencionalnu. Sveta Trojica. askeza. predawima. qubav. svrhu. sve zahvaqujuñi tome ãto ne postoji 23 24 Isto. vera. tekstovima. liånost. spisima. ãta oni govore. Bog. svimapoznatu. istinsku punoñu. odvojeno od æivota (kao moæda i „najglavnijeg izvora“24 ) bogoslovqe se polako prazni od svojih sadræaja koji poåivaju u wegovim pojmovima. Veñ smo se pitali ãta danas savremenom åoveku i hriãñaninu znaåe tradicionalni temeqni pojmovi bogoslovqa. pak. erosnom. Åudna je åiwenica. ontologija. nada. sloboda. „tumaåewima“. predstavqa laiåko bogoslovska liånost i misao poznatog Hristosa Janarasa. smirewe. nemaju! I to ne samo u svojoj recipiranosti od strane onih koji primaju i prihvataju te pojmove. bogoslova i pesnika æivota i erosa prema Svetoj Trojici i monaãko – asketska figura oca Vasilija Gondikakisa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 37 jednu „opasnu“ tezu o ispraæwewu pojmova i sadræaja bogoslovqa. „stvarnom“.. veñ su oni postali ispraæweni u sebi samima. krajwem! Izuzetak. ikonama. åak i na strani „evharistijsko eshatoloãkih“ bogoslova. post. Da pogledamo malo bliæe ovaj problem.

oni ne samo da postaju neaktuelni. 26 Kao oni koji iako jednom definisani nikada nisu zacementirani. . Nije dovoqno reñi samo: „Bog“ i oåekivati saglasnost svih oko ovog „termina“. Ali. nerecipirani i nerazumqivi.38 Teoloãki åasopis. priznajemo sa æaqewem. N° 9 neka zasebna „ontologija pojmova“25 nezavisno od liånosti i zajednice koje ih razumeju i daju im smisao i semantiåko znaåewe. jer.biznis institucija. Tako. naã dvig ka Wemu. duhovnost. oni su danas postali autonomni i samodovoqni pamfleti kojima hriãñani neuspeãno pokuãavaju da predstave svoj identitet i 25 Papadopulos. ili kao nacional – institucija – åuvar. Neshvatawem i neæivqewem istinskog smisla koju pojmovi imaju u sebi26. veñ postaju mrtvi! Dolazimo do uvida da.. 1998: 53.. darovi! Odvojeni od Spasiteqa. odnoãewa ka svetu i ka sebi samima. åak i oni „van Crkve“ mogu nas mnogo nauåiti tome. postoji mnoãtvo religija koje se pozivaju na pravoverno tumaåewe istog. veñ da su sami hriãñani „ubili“ svoje sopstvene znakove sporazumevawa. naravno. nije samo „svet“ onaj koji. danas reå „Crkva“ veñini zvuåi ili kao druãtveno – humanitarno . oni se pretvaraju u znakove – tragove iza kojih zjapi praznina od ispraæwenosti smisla i naznaåewa. Ãta tek reñi za pojmove: spasewe. Mada. naãe æivqewe. jedino isti ti hriãñani mogu ponovo oæiveti svoje pojmove i uåiniti ih razumqivim i spasavajuñim. u ovom sluåaju savremenih qudi i hriãñana. dakle. S druge strane. od Duha i od Darodavca istih. u ovaj naã æivot. veñ uvek otvoreni za „dogaœaj dolaska Drugog“ u naãu aktuelnost i savremenost. ili u najboqem sluåaju kao joã jedna grupa koja se „bavi duhovnoãñu“. takav kakav je i nijedan drugi. usled svoje „greãnosti i sekularizovanosti“ neñe da åuje za hriãñanstvo. Tako. ali Koji potrebuje naã priziv. stvari su joã teæe sa klasiåno hriãñanskim pojmovima. razumevawa.

tj. kakvu autentiånost. U suãtini. ili neãto tako sliåno. Kakvu reå. maske. Mi upuñujemo na joã ãire posmatrawe problema. jer nam je ona najoåiglednija u aktuelnom æivotu naãe pomesne Crkve i wenih parohija.od – muåewa – u – paklu“ konotaciju. teatralnost. ili bivajuñi izvor istog. to sve dotiåe i crkvenu poboænost kao izraz bogoslovqa i bogosluæewa. naivnost. Imajuñi pred sobom „krizirajuñe“ bogoslovqe. liturgije. gluma. a svi zajedno odvojeni od æivota. kakav æivot svetu i åoveku moæe ponuditi jedno razcrkvqeno bogoslovqe. bezidentitetnost. posledica su ove razdvojenosti. uzdasi. tj. . Ipak. Ali o tome je joã davno mnogo reåeno. jedna bezbogoslovska liturgija i jedna neevharistijska poboænost (s tim da su meœusobne varijante istih bezbrojne)? Laænu reå. mrtvu stvarnost. Naravno. Problema koji se javqaju u obzorju smrti åoveåije i wegove prolaznosti. Problemi koji se javqaju u „naåinima“ sluæewa. „askezama“. bogosluæewa uopãte kao „dela naroda“. Problem jezika bogosluæewa nemamo hrabrosti ni da zapoåenemo. „spasiti se“ najåeãñe sa sobom ima druãtveno – ekonomsku ili „spasiti – se . Za proseånog hriãñanina. „starinama“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 39 svoju posebnost u odnosu na druge27. tako i mrtvoj poboænosti prete iste nepogode. marame i ãamije. imitacija æivog æivota Crkve. S tim povezan i uslovqen jeste problem liturgije. bogosluæewe i poboænost su odvojeni od bogoslovqa i obrnuto. „obiåajima“. hiperrealno posto27 Za ovu tvrdwu namerno ne navodimo nikakvu referencu. pokuãavajuñi s tim da poveæemo problem bogoslovqa. Kao i mrtvom bogoslovqu. „praksama“. kakvu stvarnost. Neaktuelnost. ne moæemo prenebregnuti problem svojevrsne „poboænosti“ koja se raœa u trenucima kada neevharistijsko bogoslovqe preokupira naãu paæwu i naãe poboæne postupke. poboænosti. bogosluæewe se pretvara u pojavu koju ovako definiãemo: sentimentalno señawe na davne dogaœaje iz æivota Hristovog.

uãivawem u mrtve kalupe æivota. za dogaœaj qubavi izmeœu Hrista i Wegove Crkve. mræwa. mrtvilo mrtvosti. jeziåkih oblikovawa. saborni. preævakavawa starih floskula. liturgija i poboænost umiru i postaju samo jedni od fosila u muzejskoj zbirci interesantnih. oni postaju iznova aktuelni. sa svim svojim sivilom svakodnevnice tragedija. trvewa. tj. „pravoslavnih etika“. obiåaja. onih qudi i hriãñana koji odriåuñi se svakog olakog definisawa. na tom Mestu. sam obiåan æivot svakodnevnice Crkve. Izvor takvog æivog bogoslovqa. Evharistije. moæe biti govora o govoru dolazeñeg. tj.Drugog“tj. b) Osvrt na ostale probleme Naravno. hriãñana. zakona. za dogaœaj veånog æivota. Ko ñe nas izbaviti od smrti ove? Daqe neñemo iñi. 2004: 34.æivota – Donositeqa.40 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 jawe. iskustveni. koje ñe imati stvarnu vezu sa naãim æivotima. evharistijska liturgija. Æivota koji je smrt od poåetka do kraja. Tako i samo tako. neshvatawa blage vesti Jevanœeqa. znawa. samo Tu moæe biti jezika o jeziku aktuelnosti. ali to i nije tema ovog rada. itd. iskuãewa. bogoslovqe. umirawa. ostvaruje sebe i svoj æivot kao æivot Crkve za dogaœaj neoåekivanog – smisla – i . æivi. Odvojeno od svog prirodnog Mesta. Æivota koji je odvojen od „dogaœaja dolaska Drugog i Drugaåijeg“. tj. liturgije i poboænosti jeste sam æivot Crkve. pravila. pored reåenog. mogli bismo se dotañi joã mnoãtva velikih i malih problema koji uznemiravaju savremeni crkveni æivot. Hrista i zajednice „prizivajuñih – Drugog“ tj. 28 Zizjulas. samim tim i zatvoren. samo Tu moæe biti pojmova o pojmovima istinskog. ali mrtvih eksponata. kao Mesta na kome Jedan postaje mnogi i mnogi postaju Jedan28 i Crkve kao zajednice „dolazeñeg . Samo Tu. To su plodovi ove krize savremenog crkvenog æivota. evharistijsko bogoslovqe. evharistijska poboænost. .

ko to sme danas da pita? Danas kada se åini da niãta nije jasnije od toga. koji je najåeãñe daleko od takvih „izmiãqenih problema“ koje utopijski bogoslovi hoñe da nametnu. Osmiãqavaju æivot svoj. bolesti u kojoj virus „neåeæwe za Drugim Dolazeñim“ uniãtava sve. da li je to pravoslavqe? A ekspanzionistiåki ãovinizam? Homofobija. insistirawe na krajwostima ãto mogu da nastanu iz neadekvatnog shvatawa ãta znaåe reåi „evharistijski“ i „eshatoloãki“. ãta je to? Ali. mnogo je nejasno. na æalost. Relevantnosti. zanemarivawem onoga ãto Crkva „kao zajednica buduñnosti“ jeste. postaje danas ne mali problem. moæda? Mræwa? A ostalo? Jel’ to pravoslavqe? Za mnoge. Kako prosuditi sva izvitoperewa koja se javqaju u onome ãto mi zovemo „pravoslavqe“? Pravoslavqe. Problemi identiteta istih. posebno Novog Zaveta. Takoœe. . Nama nije jasno. monaha i wihove svojevrsne teoretske i stvarne razdvojenosti. jeste. Poseban problem predstavqa pojava onog ãto smo napred nazvali „evharistijsko – eshatoloãki utopizam“. „buduñnosti“. naroåito kod epigona jednog takvog utopizma. a pritom nemaju nikakvih suãtinskih veza sa pravoslavqem kao „iskustvom susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka“. tj. ali i unutar sveta. izraza i izvoœewa bogosluæewa. pred nama stoje problemi klira. Brinuñi se samo za „ontologije“. kao jednog od temeqa bogoslovqa i iskustva Crkve. U stvari. Ipak. bolesti odvajawa i razdvajawa bogoslovqa – liturgije – poboænosti. krstonosnim i muånim izazovom problema koji se nalaze unutar Crkve. laika. a takoœe i za liturgijske sitnice oko pitawa pokreta. Nacionalizam. Wihovi. antagonisti s druge strane. to je samo joã jedan posledica one bolesti napred formulisane. koji je jedan te isti æivot Crkve. ovi epigoni zanemaruju probleme Crkve koji su problemi ovog – ovde svakodnevnog æivota. Zanemarivawe Svetog Pisma Crkve.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 41 Spomenimo samo to da crkveno i hriãñansko bogoslovqe stoji pred teãkim. Puteva kojima se oni kreñu. pak. Mnoge se pojave proglaãavaju pravoslavnim. „eshatologije“.

kao „znaka Carstva Boæijeg“. koja je uvek saborna. Oåekuje. neiskustvenog). Ali samo ako bude daqi podstrek za joã jaåe traæewe.42 Teoloãki åasopis. Nada se. Åeka. promisliti mesto veronauke kao joã jednog od „predmeta“ u sistemu dræavnog obrazovawa (deduktivno – racionalistiåkog. i to ñe. Problem katiheze. Ostaje joã gomila problema pred kojim Crkva stoji. otvarawe. Problemi dehumanizacije. makar malo. Ali. do iznemoglosti.. borbe za mesto u druãtvu. 29 Potrebno je iznova. Problemi. tj. razmekãavawe. problemi. Vapi za Onim koji jedini moæe „doneti“ problemima otvarawe. Problem Crkve i politike. Problem ekumenizma. iãåekivawe. Bioetiåki problemi i iskuãewa tehnologije i kibernetike. biti dovoqno. . Traæi. uvek zajedniåka. N° 9 istiåu nedostatak aktivizma. za poåetak. osoqavawe. uvek liturgijska. tj. itd. dok Dolazeñi ne doœe. ali opet promaãujuñi istinski smisao Crkve. o opasnosti wene otrgnutosti od smisla prave crkvene katiheze. tj. osmiãqavawe. to je prevelika tema za ovaj premali prostor. sa trezvenoãñu. problemi. tj. veronauke u ãkolama29. evharistijska i na-zajednicu-dolazeñegCarstva-upuñujuña. Strepi. Svetlo „personalistiåke ontologije“ mitropolita Zizjulasa moæe zasvetliti.

Ratzinger. Kopiñ. Jovan 1998. John 2008. Chicago: Indiana University Press. Rijeka: Ex Libris. Sremski Karlovci: Kwiæarnica Zorana Stojanoviña. Novi Sad: Beseda.The Theology of Event. Evharistija i Carstvo Boæije. Joseph 1984. Uvod u krãñanstvo. Hristov æivot u nama.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 43 BIBLIOGRAFIJA Zizjulas. Aleksandar 2008. Beograd: Obraz svetaåki. Sarajevo: Ãahin – Paãiñ. Pisanje i razlika. Lestviånik. Beograd: Hriãñanska misao. Mario 2008. Ãmeman. . Jaques 2004. The Weakness of God . Izazovi post – metafizike. Moltmann. Jurgen 2008. Teologija i jezik. Naã æivot u Hristu. Raspeti Bog. Caputo. Sveta Gora Atonska: Hilandar. Stilijan 1998. Jovan 2004. Derrida. Papadopulos. Zagreb: Krãñanska misao.

Takoœe. 11 070 Novi Beograd Originalni nauåni rad vcvetkovska-ocokoljic@megatrend. Primljeno: 21. wihovom poreklu i wihovoj ulozi u prenoãewu nevidqivog sveta materijalnim sredstvima izraæavawa na ikoni Pedesetnica. S obzirom na to da je kroz istoriju hriãñanstva slika imala. kolebqivu ali veoma vaænu ulogu u prenoãewu Predawa.edu.02. i svakome daje posebne darove.rs Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: pisani i slikani izvori Rezime U ovom radu ñe se govoriti o simbolici hriãñanskog praznika Pedesetnica. ovaj praznik je posebno vaæan jer Sveti Duh silazi na svakog ålana Crkve. opisan je na ikonama praznika Pedesetnica. Taj naroåiti dar. Na dan Pedesetnice. ponaosob. u ovom radu je naglasak na istraæivawu simbolizma pojedinaånih likovnih elemenata (boje.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 45 dr Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoqiñ UDK 291. Naroåito je vaæan dogaœaj u kome apostoli govore razliåitim jezicima i razumeju se meœusobno. ikona.01. simbolizam. Kquåne reåi: Pedesetnica. perspektive). Sveti Duh. geometrije. koji se javqa kroz delovawe Svetog Duha.2010 Goce Delåeva 8. kroz pisane i slikane izvore.2010 Megatrend univerzitet Prihvañeno: 18.36 Fakultet za kulturu i medije. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole i obnavqa jedinstvo Boga i qudi kroz duhovnu izgradwu Crkve. .

meœutim wen opstanak govori o tome da posredstvom we. koje izraæavaju razliåita znaåewa 1 Jovanoviñ. opipqivim sredstvima izraæavawa vekovima je bila u sluæbi religije. . ove dve ikone. Ovim praznikom proslavqa se „zavrãni åin osnivawa Hristove Crkve na zemqi. Poreklo praznika pedesetnica Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole spada u Velike praznike a poznat je pod imenima: Duhovi. Æeqa åoveka da dosegne duhovne visine i danas je podjednako aktuelna a civilizacijski razvoj nije uspeo da zadovoqi wegov unutraãwi svet. propovedaju i åine åuda“1. a dvanaestorica apostola udostojeni da svedoåe o Hristu. åovek moæe sozercati nevidqivog Boga i ugledati se na svetiteqe i muåenike. te je stoga odreœeno kao civilizacija slike. Uloga ikone – kao religijske slike bila je kolebqiva u hriãñanskoj istoriji. 2005: 387. Sveti Duh je izlio svoje brojne darove na prisutne i omoguñio poåetak stvarawa zemaqske Crkve po uzoru na nebesku. N° 9 Uvod Savremeno druãtvo ispuweno je brojnim slikama. Åovekova potreba da nevidqivo predstavi materijalnim. oboæewe apostola i poåetak duhovnog puta. a sledeñi dan (Duhovski ponedeqak) je posveñen Svetom Duhu. kada su stvoreni uslovi za wen pun æivot. Prema reåima Uspenskog s obzirom na to da se u pravoslavnoj Crkvi praznik Svete Trojice slavi na prvi dan Pedesetnice (u nedequ) i da se na taj dan kroz bogosluæewe izraæava dogmatsko uåewe o Svetoj Trojici. Trojice i Trojiåin dan. Ikona Pedesetnice stoga ima podjednaku vaænost ali i dodatnu vrednost jer se na dan Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispunilo obeñawe Hrista.46 Teoloãki åasopis.

Loski 2008: 202. Tako se kroz ikonu Svete Trojice daje nagoveãtaj tajnovitosti Boæanskog postojawa. Sin se vratio Ocu. Evdokimov: 2009: 230. ovaj praznik je imao i drugo znaåewe. 2003: 120. dok Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole otkriva promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta3. Benc.16). Tako Sveti Duh ispuwava opãtu voqu tri Lica. Poseban znaåaj ova dva praznika objediwuje se u vidqivom silasku Svetog Duha na apostole. 3. uzviãenom u Boga i u Svetom Duhu koji se razliåitim darovima Duha moñno pojavqivao meœu wima“4. Loski. i praznik berbe na svrãetku svake godine. buduñi da ga ãaqe Otac i da ga predaje Sin5. u vaskrslom Gospodu Isusu Hristu. u znak zahvalnosti prema Bogu. u krãtewu Crkve ogwem i Svetim Duhom. . odgovaraju prazniku Pedesetnica2. Isto. On je proslavqan i kao zahvalnost za prve plodove na zemqi. stvarawe saveza izmeœu Boga i izabranog naroda. Slavqen po isteku sedam nedeqa. O danu odmora.11). buduñu æetvu i kao dan (dar) Gospoda: „I praznik æetve prvina od truda tvojega ãto posijeã u poqu svojem. kad sabereã trud svoj sa wive“ (2 Moj. na pedeseti dan posle Pashe. 2008: 208. Vernici doæivqavaju Boæiju stvarnost kao i prvi hriãñani. u trostrukom obliåju: „u Tvorcu i Gospodu istorije spasewa. 2006: 520. „Kada je wegovo poslawe okonåano. pedeset dana nakon Hristovog vaskrsewa i deset dana nakon wegovog vaznesewa. Praznik 2 3 4 5 6 Uspenski. kada je Mojsije primio Zakon na Sinaju. 23. Silazak Svetog Duha predstavqa drugo delovawe Oca jer Otac najpre ãaqe Sina a zatim i Svetog Duha. Poreklo praznika Pedesetnica potiåe iz Starog Zaveta. a Sveti Duh je siãao kao Liånost“6.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 47 i smisao. kao señawe na unutraãwe jedinstvo. u skladu sa reåima svetog Jovana Preteåe (Mat.

U skladu sa starozavetnim savezom koji je naåinio Bog izmeœu sebe i qudi.48 Teoloãki åasopis. povezan je suãtinski s ovim uåewem. Tako je Pedesetnica. Apostoli su predstavqeni potpuno smireno. da imate sabor sveti. 28. kroz silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. zapravo posledica Ovaploñewa. koja je izdvojena prirodom i mnoãtvom liånosti. Kwige i svitci ukazuju na buduñu misiju apostola. Loski. 2. Æivot Crkve. i siœe po jedan na svakoga od wih“ (Dap. Isto. jer je Trojiånost. javqa se novozavetni Savez. jer je tvorevina postala sposobna da primi Sveti Duh. naåelo u skladu sa kojim Crkva æivi i gradi Boæije kraqevstvo na zemqi“8. åine apostoli koji sede polukruæno postavqeni i plameni jezici koji sa neba silaze na wihove glave: „I pokazaãe im se razdijeqeni jezici kao ogweni. . „Tako blagodat zakona data Svetim Duhom preuzima mesto zakona sa Sinaja“7. Loski 2008: 202. N° 9 Nedeqa se kao señawe na dan otkrivewa zakona uobliåio kao duhovni i materijalni dar od Boga: „I na dan prvina kad prinosite nov dar Gospodu poslije svojih nedeqa. Posebna vrednost ikone Pedesetnica je u tome ãto „izraæava najpotpuniju dogmu praznika povezanog sa osnovnom dogmom hriãñanstva – Trojedinim Bogom. na wihovo propo7 8 9 10 Uspenski.26). dræeñi svitke ili kwige u rukama. kako se uobiåajeno prikazuje. 2003: 122. nijednoga posla ropskoga ne radite“ (4 Moj. Evdokimov: 2009: 232.3). sledi Liturgiju i stvara jednu ogromnu perspektivu koja prevazilazi okvire istorijskog fragmenta da bi izrazila ‘unutraãwu reå’ dogaœaja“ 10. Osnovne kompozicione elemente ikone Pedesetnica. ili u æivom meœusobnom zajedniåarewu. 2008: 209. i time je ostvaren konaåni ciq Boæanstvenog domostroja na zemqi9. Ikona Pedesetnice „objediwuje sve tekstove Svetog Pisma.

Vajcman ovu ikonu datira u 10. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. u sredini je scena Vaznesewa a u dowem delu. U tom srediãwem delu je ponekad prikazana Bogorodica (kao simvol Crkve). koji deli apostole. veka (Manafis at al. u dve grupe. str. polukruænog prostora ispod apostola. Ova ikona predstavqa jednu od najstarijih grupnih ikona koja pokazuje izdvojene teme. ?. (1976: 73-76). Vremenom ñe se ustaliti izobraæavawe najpre praznog. prikaz starca-kraqa (kosmos) a povremeno i qudskih figura koje simbolizuju predstavnike razliåitih naroda. u istom nivou scena Predstavqawe u hramu. Naroåito interesantan je srediãwi deo ikone. prikazana je scena Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. koji su bili prisutni u trenutku ovog velikog dogaœaja (Dap 2. kao nevidqivo prisustvo Hrista – Glave Crkve. 2.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 49 vedawe a gestikulacija i razgovor ukazuju na silazak Svetog Duha „i ispuniãe se svi Duha Svetoga i stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima“ (Dap.59). Rani prikazi praznika pedesetnica Najstarija poznata ikona na kojoj se pojavquje silazak Svetog Duha na apostole – Pedesetnica (Penthkosth) potiåe iz 7. na Tajnoj veåeri uspostavqena Evharistija – hleb i vino). u monografiji Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery.4). gde jarko crveni zraci koji se spuãtaju na apostole. Vidi u Weitzmann. a potom unutar tog prostora. 140. Weitzmann. tamnog. . koji sede u gornici (koja simvolizuje nastavak propovedi jer je u gornici. ali je najåeãñe prostor ostavqen prazan. na Sinaju. Na woj su prikazane åetiri scene u tri reda: Na vrhu ikone prikazana je scena Roœewe Isusa Hrista a odmah pored we. izbor najvaænijih 11 Ozoqin ikonu datira u 7. K. 1990: 98). veka ili poåetak 10. slika 7. izviru iz kruæne mandorle (medaqona) u kojoj je Hristos. vek. ikona je datirana u drugu polovinu 9. Princeton University Press. veka11 i nalazi se u manastiru Sveta Katarina. vek. Takoœe.

2007: 28. wegov istraæivaåki rad ukazuje na to da je prvobitna ikonografija praznika Pedesetnica bila povezana sa praznikom Vaznesewe i da su pre wegovog „osamostaqewa“ rani hriãñani praznovali „osmi dan“ (Gospodwi dan) a „Dan pashe“ je slavqen kao tajna ærtve. koji su predstavqeni u sedeñem poloæaju. prinoseñi åoveka kao dar Bogu. posredstvom Svetog Duha. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole u skladu sa obeñawem Spasiteqa: „A Utjeãiteq Duh Sveti. nadnosi nad qude i usinovquje ih. u pokretu ogwenih jezika Otac. Sveti Duh u obliku goluba se pojavquje prethodno na krãtewu Isusa Hrista. veka“14. 98-99. Ipak. Evdokimov. potiåu iz perioda nakon ikonoborstva. tako se i na dan Pedesetnice. Interesantno je primetiti da se u sredini. simetriju i druge uobiåajene elemente putem kojih opisani dogaœaj otkriva sveto projavqivawe i slavu12. koga ñe otac poslati u ime 12 13 14 Manafis. 1990. ærtvova se za nas“ (1 Kor.7). da bude novo tijesto. u åetrdeseti dan posle Vaskrsa i Silaska Svetog Duha. N° 9 kompozicionih elemenata. nalazi jedva primetan golub naslikan s lica (iscrtan na zlatnoj pozadini). kao ãto ste beskvasni. Jer i Pasha naãa Hristos. stari kvasac. u pedeseti dan – znaåi veñ krajem 4. a opravdawe na sceni Pedesetnica (gde ñe se i kasnije pojavqivati povremeno) moæe se pronañi u reåima Evdokimova13 da kao ãto se Sveti Duh na dan krãtewa Gospodweg nadnosi nad qudsku prirodu Hristovu i usinovquje je. a wena ikonografija se mewa „odvajawem praznika Vaznesewa. jer sva kasnija izobraæewa. u skladu sa Prvom poslanicom Korinñanima „Odbacite. dakle. . izmeœu apostola. Ozoqin celokupnu ikonografiju naziva starohriãñanskom. Ozoqin. koja ñe se ubrzo uobliåiti u prikaz Pedesetnice. veñ kao tajna izbavqewa jer u pedeseti dan posle vaskrsewa Hrista.50 Teoloãki åasopis. 2009: 230. Tako se ona ne smatra samo kao posledwi dan pashalnog perioda. Meœutim. 5. a ispod Hrista u mandorli.

Vidi: Slika 8 (Ozoqin. veka (Bobbio. Gorwi deo scene prati iste elemente 15 Isto.26). dva åovjeka u haqinama bijelim stadoãe pored wih“ (Dap. a sa leve strane je starozavetni sveãtenik sa kadionicom u ruci17. moguñe predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha u obliku plamenih zraka. veka (Monza. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. nedeqa saæima unutar sebe u jedan dan „tajinsko znaåewe pedeset dana“15. Sa desne strane Bogorodice nalazi se sveti Jovan Krstiteq u stavu propovedawa. Sliåna predstava Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje se i na ampuli iz 10. Iznad wene glave. Na levu i desnu grupu od Bogorodice. 2016) u sceni Vaznesewe. 16 Vidi: Slika 3 (Ozoqin. br. 10). 2007: 39. sa pretpostavkom da se odnose na ogwene jezike silaska Svetog Duha18. 2007: 46). Ovu scenu Ozoqin naziva Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica (2007: 40).14). 1. koji nose upaqene bakqe“. koji blagosiqa. br. Meœutim. „Posledwi dan pedesetnice. simboliåko znaåewe u odnosu na realno prisustvo u trenutku nekog dogaœaja. On ñe vas nauåiti svemu i podsjetiñe vas na sve ãto vam rekoh“ (Jovan 14. 18 19 Vidi: Ozoqin. likovi imaju dubqe. Jedno od utemeqewa wenog prisustva na ovoj sceni pronalazimo u pomenu zajedniåke molitve: „Ovi svi bijahu istrajno i jednoduãno na molitvi i moqewu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 51 moje. prañen anœelom. Hrista na prestolu sa kwigom u ruci. postavqena je „zvezda prañena personifikacijama sunca i meseca. 2007: 32-36. pronalazi se joã na ampuli iz 6. gle. u mandorli. takoœe prañen anœelom: „I dok netremice gledahu za wim kako ide na nebo. 1019). 1. spuãta se po pet zraka iz Hristove mandorle. 2007: 33). U dowem delu nalazi se Bogorodica Oranta. 17 S obzirom na to da na ikoni ne postoji hronoloãko vreme. u gorwem delu. anœelima. noãen. . sa æenama i sa Marijom materom Isusovom i sa brañom wegovom“ (Dap. Na woj pronalazimo.

veñ da su se proizvodile u velikoj koliåini. dræaå za lampu od terakote (3. podiæe se i uze ga oblak ispred oåiju wihovih“. 2. N° 9 predstavqawa dok je na dowem delu prikazana Bogorodica Oranta. 1. veka pomiwe se da je postojala grnåarska radionica koja je proizvodila 15 000 kråaga za vino.2). Takoœe se smatra da ampule22 nisu bile unikatan proizvod. i da su predstavqale neãto nalik danaãwem industrijskom. slika 20. prati isti kompozicioni obrazac kao ampula sa svetim Minom (Templ. Tako one nisu bile usamqeni proizvodi ranih hriãñanskih umetnika veñ tipski. Meœutim. Grnåarija je bila jeftina i masovno se proizvodila. to je postalo sve. 2007: 45-47. godiãwe. „jer je sve to ruka moja stvorila. U jednom egipatskom papirusu iz 3. usmereni ka apostolima.52 Teoloãki åasopis. Boæijom vaznese se“ (Dap. 23). 66.33). serijskom proizvodu.9). veli Gospod“ (Is. Ozoqin21 smatra da je ovo prvo (poznato) predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole i da je usled nepostojawa posebne ikonografije vezane za ovaj dogaœaj. a u hriãñanskom slikarstvu se javqa od 4. vek) na kome je prikazan Danilo sa lavovima. Gabra (2001. Takoœe. okruæena apostolima. 2009: 126). nalazi se otvorena (desnica20) ruka Gospodwa jer „Desnicom. scena prikquåena Vaznesewu. 1.8) neposredno pre Vaznesewa („I ovo rekavãi dok oni netremice gledahu. 21 22 Vidi: Ozoqin. Dap. 20 Likovni simvol boæanskog delovawa i spasewa. dakle. dubqa simbolika pronalazi se u bliskoj vezi izmeœu ova dva dogaœaja jer Hristos obeñava Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole („nego ñete primiti silu kada siœe Sveti Duh“ Dap. 2005: 374). Ispod mandorle sa Hristom. veka (Jovanoviñ. namewenog za prodaju hodoåasnicima. po tipskom obrascu srebrnih ploåica. . Brojne ampule (ili åuturice) bile su åesto ukraãavane scenom svetog Mine u molitvi. Vidi: Skalova. poznat u antici i judaistiåkom slikarstvu. sa dve kamile koje kleåe. koja je ispustila goluba – Svetog Duha a sa obe wene strane izviru kratki svetlosni zraci iz mandorle.

i iz åijeg kquna izlazi pomenuti plamen.) pokazujuñi da Sveti Duh prebiva u svetima“25.47). okruæena apostolima na åijim oreolima se nalaze plameni jeziåci a iznad wih je tamni svod koji se nalazi iznad celokupne grupe.. Loski 2008: 209. to jest u gornici. Tako se scena Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje u dva sirijska rukopisa (14-16. Na oreolu Bogorodice (koji je jedini pozlañen) je takoœe plameni jezik ali je on povezan sa golubom koji se nalazi iznad we i spuãta se iz nebeskog svoda. Bogorodica kao majka Crkve. to jest gornicu. 2007: 60-65). Vidi: Slika 12 (Ozoqin. Postavqawe plamenih jezika na oreole. moæe svedoåiti sledeña opisana iluminacija.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 53 utvrœeni obrasci izobraæavawa scena i svetiteqa. 2007: 53). 2. u kojoj su apostoli bili okupqeni u trenutku silaska Svetog Duha26. ikona ili fresaka. prema reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova ukazuje na to da je Sveti Duh siãao u obliku jezika „koji su spuãteni na glave apostola. U prilog tome da su one najverovatnije bile replike scena sa iluminiranih rukopisa. zadræava srediãwe mesto u predstavi „a Gospod svaki dan dodavaãe Crkvi one koji se spasavahu“ (Dap. Bogorodica je prikazana u sredini. Detaqnije (Ozoqin. Vremenom ñe se luåni (arhitektonski) svod izobraæavati kao aluzija na mesto dogaœaja.. 25 26 Uspenski. Tako se ona pojavquje u saåuvanom rukopisu (Jevanœeqe iz Ravule) krajem 6. 2005: 388. kao znak prosvetqewa osnovnog åelovoœe tela i sadræanih misli (. Moæe se 23 Pojedinaåni sluåajevi ovakvih scena javqañe se povremeno i kasnije. vek) sa novinom uvoœewa elementa enterijera koji ukazuje na odvijawe dogaœaja u zatvorenom prostoru. . odmah iznad glava apostola. veka24. Jovanoviñ. 24 Rukopis se nalazi u Lavrentinskoj biblioteci u Firenci. Vremenom ñe se scene Vaznesewe i Pedesetnica razdvojiti23 ali ñe Bogorodica joã dugo åiniti sastavni deo brojnih ikona Pedesetnice.

otvorena kwiga Jevanœeqa. simvolizujuñi prikaz uzlaznog puta na ikoni. unutar trodelne kompozicije. simvol Sina. N° 9 pretpostaviti da je nebeski svod predstavqen iseåkom iznad Bogorodice i apostola preteåa uspostavqawa polukruænog prostora koji ñe se kasnije javiti. prazna stolica nije izvorno hriãñanskog porekla. Meœutim. 2. kao i brojni drugi kompozicijski elementi i simvoli. pojava praznog prostora moæe se pratiti joã od burnog ikonoboraåkog perioda 9. Loski. tron. Tako je opisana simboliåka predstava neopisive Svete Trojice. . „Svi apostoli gledaju ka sredini gde se nalazi simboliåka predstava Svete Trojice. Silazak Svetog Duha koji proishodi iz Oca i izliva se kroz Boga Sina (Dap. dok ñe se uporedo sa wim razviti polukruæni prostor ispod apostola sa simvolizacijom mraka . u manastiru Sveta Katarina. ñe se vremenom ustaliti. simvol Oca. Uspenski. i jedan golub na Kwizi. nalazi se prazan prostor. veka.33) otkriva svetu blagodarnost bogopoznawa tajanstva Svete Trojice. Ova scena u skladu je sa reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova da je na dan silaska Svetog Duha na apostole projavqeno konaåno delovawe Treñe liånosti Svete Trojice kao sile osveñewa. 2008: 202. iz 7. a koji se prvi put pojavquje joã na pomenutoj ikoni. iznad apostola.54 Teoloãki åasopis. koji ostaje iza wih. izmeœu apostola. odnosno konaåno ispuwewe obeñawa. Obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (bez prisustva Bogorodice ali sa prikazom zlatnog goluba) koji primaju Sveti Duh. simvol Svetog Duha“27. U sredini. ni ugotovqeni presto. jednosuãtne i nerazdeqive. na iluminacijama iz Hludovskog Psaltira. odreœen praznim tronom (ugotovqenim prestolom). veka. a ipak razliåite“28. Takoœe.neznaboæaåkog sveta. Prema reåima Uspenskog 27 28 Ozoqin. Tako dolazi do ispuwewa otkrivewa jednog Boga u tri Ipostasi. 2007: 74. Ovaj prikaz prisutan je u antici a joã ranije u scenama drevnog Egipta kao simbol prisustva nevidqivog Boga.

Kao ãto „iziœe Isus i uåaãe“ (veliko veåerwe. . 2008: 208. Loski. Moñ propovedawa (kao jedan od darova) se sa Hrista (bogoåoveka).2). Tako i uputstvo za izobraæavawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole (poznatom i kao Duhovi) u Kwizi popa 29 30 31 Uspenski. 5) jer Gospod kaæe: „Sabrañu sve narode“ (Joil. postavqenih u polukrugu. Tako su „dvanaest apostola koji obrazuju jedan konaåan oblik (polukrug) predivan izraz jedinstva tela Crkve sa raznovrsnoãñu wenih ålanova“ a wihovo grupisawe je dovrãeno prazninom – nepopuwenim mestom – mestom nevidqive glave Crkve.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 55 hriãñanstvo je u mnogoboæaåkom svetu izabralo sve ono ãto je wegovo i nazvalo ga „hriãñanstvom pre Hrista“ 29. kroz silazak Svetog Duha. 2009: 232. åija tela åine Crkvu. stihira glasa 2) obrañajuñi se stareãinama naroda tako su se i apostoli okupili u nedoumici oko naåina propovedawa i iãåekivawu da postanu dostojni da ãire Hristovu nauku. Od 12. 2. 3. izvija se i wen dowi deo obrazujuñi polukruæni tamni prostor. Qudi na sceni simvolizuju „qude poboæne iz svakog naroda koji je pod nebom“ (Dap. 6. veka sve åeãñe se javqaju ikone Pedesetnice bez prisustva Bogorodice.14) kao dvanaest plemena Izraiqa. Uporedo sa izvijawem polukruæne klupe na kojoj sede apostoli. prenosi na åoveka (apostole). Evdokimov. Hristos nije vidqivo prisutan ali je On „Glava koja je uvek prisutna“31. odnosno Hristom“30. Otkr. Oni se nalaze unutar enterijera. i primaju Sveti Duh. Na wenom mestu postavqen je prazan prostor koji odvaja dve grupe apostola. Uspenski. dakle u gornici. U wemu se javqaju dva prikaza: qudi i/ili kraq. Apostoli su prikazani.13. Tako se uspostavqa obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (Lk. najåeãñe u æivoj gestikulaciji dok se na wihove oreole iz nebeskog svoda spuãtaju zraci Duha Svetog. 20. 2000: 50. Ova scena kompozicijski veoma podseña na ikonu Poduåavawe u hramu.

Tu uze sveti Luka i naslika åetiri ikone gledajuñi na lice Bogorodice. Mediñ. Sveti 32 33 34 35 36 Poznatoj i pod nazivom Drugi jerusalimski rukopis. Luka se tako nazva prvi zograf na zemqi“36. 2002: 615-616. Jovanoviñ.) I tu uzeãe hartiju i pisahu. i oko wega jako svetlo a dvanaest ogwenih jezika izlazi od wega i spuãta se na svakog pojedinog od tih apostola“35. Glas sa nebesa prestade.. i ispod wih mala prostorija. U priruåniku za ikonopisce pod nazivom Erminija porodice Zografski34 (1728) pronalazimo sledeñe uputstvo za slikawe scene Silazak Svetog Duha: „Dom i dvanaestorica apostola sede u polukrugu. Najraniji poznati prevod Erminije Dionisija iz Furne na slovenski jezik. Prema apokifnom jevanœequ ikona (slikana rukom åoveka) je nastala neposredno posle Jevanœeqa: „ (. tada prinese svako svoje napisano. i u woj star åovek dræi pred sobom ubrus obema rukama. na glavi ima krunu i nad wim ova slova (KOZMOS?) a slavenski (M?R?). sluãajuñi glas sa nebesa. Mediñ. Novogradska ikona pedesetnice – silazak svetog duha na apostole Uloga ikone je da propoveda podjednako kao i reå. gore. I utvrdiãe ga u Veliki Åetvrtak. . i nad domom.. N° 9 Danila32 (1674) sadræi tekst prema Isaiji: „Gospod ovo kaæe: Uzeñu vas iz svih naroda i okupiti vas iz svih plemena“33.56 Teoloãki åasopis. i na ubrusu dvanaest svitaka. Sveti Duh kao golub. 2002: 319. 2005: 367. I sastaviãe sveto Jevanœeqe. Kada prostreãe i proåitaãe.

Ikona Pedesetnica – Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole pripada Novgorodskoj ãkoli iz 15. Tako se Sveti Duh izliva na apostole ali i na sve prisutne „jednoduãno“ (Dap. to jest prikazivawu viãeg. Stav koji je dominirao na ikoni ranijih vekova zamewuje se gestikulacijom. Na ikoni kao i na fresci. Stoga su na ikoni prisutni svi apostoli.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 57 Grigorije Palama kaæe da „åovek ne moæe videti Boga drugaåije osim posredstvom simvola i telesnih praobraza“37. uvodeñi posmatraåa u drugu. iz razliåitih uglova) ikona o kojoj se ovde govori uspela je da saåuva vezu sa predawem u svom najåistijem duhovnom smislu. vidqivim i prepoznatqivim sredstvima komunikacije. bezvremenu ravan. . boæanskog sveta materijalnim. veka pojavquje manirizam u ikonopisu. Iako se veñ od 13. a wen odnos koji je uvek bio „spoqa“ prema onome koji se moli. kao znak krãtewa Duhom i vatrom jer po reåima Joila Gospod kaæe: „Izliñu od Duha mojega na svako tijelo“ (Dap. 2. i 14. postepeno se okreñe ka unutra. na vrhu scene prikazan je u polukrugu nebeski svod. Ona simvolizuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu. Kompozicija.1). perspektiva. iz profila. Na ikoni su prikazani apostoli koji sede na polukruæno postavqenoj klupi (eksedri). Telo Crkve i sklad sabornosti prikazan na ovoj ikoni izobraæavañe se vremenom na svim prikazima vaseqenskih sabora. eshatoloãki smisao. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. uvoœewem dimenzije stvarnog prostora i vremena (prikazivawe s leœa. 17. 2. 28-29). U povijenom luku ispod wih. 2000: 161. 2. iz kojeg se spuãta dvanaest ogwenih zraka ili vatrenih jezika (ovde prikazanih u tamno plavoj boji) na apostole. ka sopstvenom svetu. u zatvorenoj prostoriji (gornici). veka (Rusija). svaki detaq. boja. postavqen je kraq u crvenoj odeædi i sa belim ubrusom na kome se nalazi dvanaest svitaka. Iznad. duhovnu 37 Uspenski. celina i celokupna scena imaju svoj naroåit. u mraku. Joil.

. celina koju obrazuju ukazuje na wihovo meœusobno razumevawe. Paris Graec. nasuprot pometwi jezika u Vavilonu. 2007: 6). 40 Jedan od upeåatqivih primera prikazivawa mnogoqudnosti je iluminirani prikaz Pedesetnice u Besedama svetog Grigorija Bogoslova (Nacionalna biblioteka. Pariz. 12. Zajedno. 8. kondak glasa 8).13). folio 301). mnogoqudnost40 koja se pomiwe u Delima apostolskim. 510.4). jer „stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima. sve je pozvao u jedinstvo da sloæno slavimo Najsvetijeg Duha“ (Pedesetnica. 2009: 232. upravo prema reåima kondaka: „Kada je Gospod siãavãi pomeãao jezike. Tako se potvrœuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu jer „razliåiti su darovi ali je Duh isti“ (1 Kor. veka prema Ozoqinu. Apostoli su izobraæeni u odeñi filosofa – uåiteqa. Svaki apostol je u posebnom i drugaåijem stavu i poloæaju od ostalih u skladu sa primawem raznovrsnih darova (1 Kor. Bogosluæewe na dan Silaska Svetog Duha. Vidi: Ocokoqiñ. jer su pojedini qudi koji su ih posmatrali govorili „nakitili su se“ ili „napili su se slatkog vina“ (Dap. objavquje wihovo harmoniåno zajedniãtvo. Meœutim. koje se na svim ikonama Pedesetnice pojavquje (Ozoqin. Tako ñe se åudo izlivawa Svetog Duha u vidu dara jezika vremenom u crkvama podraæavati na sluæbi kroz pojavu poznatu kao glasolalija. 2. Oni sede na sitronu (antiåki obiåaj sedewa na polukruænoj klupi po vaænosti) a prvi meœu jednakima su apostol Petar i Pavle39. a kada je delio ogwene jezike. 2004: 75. kao ãto im Duh davaãe da kazuju“ (Dap.4). oni åine celinu sa jedinstvenim skladom i ritmom. kraj 9. ova ikona je dodatno neobiåna jer predstavqa jedinu poznatu ikonu na kojoj nema praznog prostora izmeœu apostola. Na ranijim prikazima. N° 9 zajednicu u kojoj liånost uzrasta38.10). delio je narode. Okrenuti jedni prema drugima oni izgledaju kao da razgovaraju. prikazivana je u dnu ikone (viãe 38 38 Evdokimov.58 Teoloãki åasopis. 2. Wihova gestikulacija ispuwena je smirewem i skladnim poretkom.

S obzirom na to da su apostoli u gornici. Joã od antike prirodna svetlost se istiåe kao uslov vidqive lepote. jer ga greh Adama åini starcem. koji su doneli svetlost åitavom svetu svojim pouåavawem“42. Meœutim. uopãte. on „pruæa ruke kako bi primio. to jest svetlosti jer „zasja se lice wegovo kao svijetlost“ i haqine wegove „postadoãe bijele kao sneg“ (Mat. Evdokimov o ovoj neobiånoj liånosti govori kao o zarobqeniku koji je okruæen sveopãtim paklom u kome se nalazi nekrãteni svet. da svako ko vjeruje u mene ne ostane u tami“ (Jov. . primetno je poistoveñivawe zlata i bele boje. blagodat a dvanaest svitaka koje sa poãtovawem dræi na pokrovu. u pisanim izvorima. Na ikoni dominiraju zlatne povrãine. svetlost o kojoj se ovde govori nije prirodna veñ Boæanska svetlost pred kojom se svetlost sunca zamraåuje. Starac obitava „u tamnom prostoru jer je ceo svet ranije bio bez vere. 2004: 75. 17. Loski 2008: 209. Stoga se tama u kojoj æive neverni moæe protumaåiti kroz reåi Gospoda: „Ja u svijet doœoh kao svjetlost. on je pognut godinama. on govori o tome kako starac i sam æeli da se prosvetli. Iznad wegove glave najåeãñe stoje inskripcije Kosmos. a on sam je Kosmos – „priroda koju je zarobio knez ovoga sveta“. Evdokimov. kraqevska kruna simvolizuje greh. 2009: 233. dakle u zatvorenoj 41 42 43 Ocokoqiñ.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 59 qudskih figura) ali ñe vremenom biti zamewena simvoliånim prikazom kraqa kao personifikacije åoveka ili qudi. 2-5). 12. Meœutim. simvolizuje propoved dvanaest apostola. i on.46). Meœutim. Svet ili Knez Mira41. uloga zlata je dubqa jer sve boje potpadaju pod zakon prirodne svetlosti a na nebesima je Boæanska svetlost koja sve proæima. koji vlada u svetu i belo platno u wegovim rukama sa dvanaest svitaka oznaåava dvanaest apostola. apostolsku misiju Crkve i obeñawe spasewa“ 43. Uspenski. wegova crvena odora simvolizuje ærtvovawe œavolove krvi. Meœutim. jer bi oblici bez svetlosti bili nevidqivi.

Isto. tmina na prozorima simvolizuje zamraåenu prirodnu svetlost usled projavqivawa Svetog Duha. ka kojoj teæi stari kraq. podjednako primajuñi Svetog Duha. Na taj naåin je ikonopisac uspeo da izbegne zamku iluzije prostora i obmane qudskog oka. oni isijavaju svetlost tako da na wima nema senki. Kompozicija ikone graœena je tako da se otvara prema nebu. dakle prati uzlaznu liniju åoveka u sozercawu „trojiåne energije usredsreœene u Svetom Duhu“45. „Kontrast izmeœu ova dva sapostojeña sveta veoma je oãtar. kao jedno telo Crkve oni duhovno uzrastaju u Hristu i uspiwu se u sozercawu Boga. 44 45 46 Templ. Tako apostoli Petar i Pavle. . gore je veñ „nova zemqa“ vizija idealnog Kosmosa obasjana boæanstvenim ogwem. 2009: 328.60 Teoloãki åasopis. preovladavaju nad ostalim apostolima. Graœevina na ikoni predstavqa zatvarawe od spoqaãweg (pojavnog) sveta i otvarawe ka duhovnom svetu unutar åoveka. 2009: 148. 2009: 328. Energije Svetog Duha dejstvuju u ciqu osloboœewa i preobraæewa zarobqenog kosmosa“46. „Unutraãwi ili duhovni svet je jedino stvarno mesto u nama u kome duhovni dogaœaji ne podleæu zakonima vremena i trodimenzionalnog prostora“44. Ikona prati naåelo obrnute perspektive u skladu sa postavqawem likova po tematskom znaåaju. prvi meœu jednakima. Evdokimov. Svi zajedno. apostoli su izvor svetlosti koja se izlila na wih. Postavqawem dva apostola na vrhu uspostavqena je zakonitost obrnute perspektive i izjednaåena vaænost apostola (prvi meœu jednakima). Na ikoni je arhitektura (koja uvek ima ulogu da prikaæe da se dogaœaj odvija u zasebnom prostoru) osobena i po tome ãto istovremeno vidimo i spoqaãwe i unutraãwe vidove kuñe. svojom veliåinom. Neproporcionalnost apostola u odnosu na graœevinu potvrœuje ovo odreœewe. Istovremeno sa uspiwawem deãava se i silazak u tamu. N° 9 prostoriji. Sa druge strane.

u odnosu na jaåinu svetlosti (krañi i duæi zraci).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 61 Zraci koji se pojavquju. vode poreklo joã iz drevnog Egipta. Na wegovom dijagramu spuãta se deset sunåevih zraka koji obasjavaju zemqu. Na osnovu ove sheme Templ (2009) je uspostavio pojam „vaseqenske topografije“ koja se javqa na svim ikonama. na osnovu Indikoplestusove topografije. „Drevni Istok je kosmos predstavqao u obliku kruga ili klipeusa i stavqao „Kosmokratora“. vek) åiji dijagram objaãwava naåin na koji se zraci sunca spuãtaju na zemqu. Prema wegovim reåima „peñina naglaãava najniæe mesto u vaseqeni“ ali i „svetlost i tama ili najviãe i najniæe povezani su sa naåelima Boæanskog zraka (ogwa)“49. Meœutim. Isto. uzdignutog na nivo boæanstva – boga Atona. kao medaqon unutar kojeg je poprsje mladiña. u wegovo srediãte“47. 2007: 141. 2009: 140. gde izviru iz kruænog oblika sunca. i moæe se tumaåiti i sa tog simboliåkog nivoa. i spuãtaju na zemqu (tj. U skladu sa opisanom simbolikom ona prati obrazac koji je uspostavio Templ (2009). Novgorodska ikona Pedesetnice strukturno je organizovana tako da podseña na stenu sa peñinom. gde su simvolizovali oæivqavajuñu svetlost sunca. zraci svetlosti se pojavquju i u drugim kulturama. Sunce je personifikovano na antiåki naåin. U hriãñanskom kontekstu sunåevi zraci se pronalaze joã u Hriãñanskoj topografiji Kosme Indikoplesta (6. Isto. Na 47 48 49 50 Ozoqin. . 2009: 114. Ajnalov (1901) je prvi izneo pretpostavku o sliånosti wegovog izobraæewa sa vizantijskom pedesetnicom48. 2007: 142. U skladu sa Plotinovim uåewem „celokupna vaseqena moæe biti uspostavqena kao oktava ili osmostepena lestvica do Boga ili Apsolutnog biña sa Vaseqenskom Tamom ili nivoom Apsolutnog Nebiña“50. qude). Templ. boga ili cara.

bdi starac. koja se zavrãava plavim lukom (veñ pomiwanom na iluminaciji u Jevanœequ iz Ravule). Tako se potvrœuje izlivawe Svetog Duha i uzlazni put na Gospodu. pronalazimo desnicu Boga. tj. vode i „rijeku vode æivota“ (Otkr. Geometrijski prikaz podjednako sadræi paralele izmeœu sheme vaseqene i ikone Pedesetnica. U tami. N° 9 nivou Carstva Tame i Zemqe. Materije paralela se moæe pronañi sa kraqem koji prebiva u tami. 1963: 80. knez ovoga sveta. Paralela se moæe pronañi i u Templovom polukruænom prikazu nebesa sa polukruænom graœevinom na ikoni. Vrhovi graœevine obrazuju obrnut trougao kao simbol Svetog Duha. . na koje se iz nebesa izliva blagodat Svetog Duha darujuñi im razne darove. Tako apostoli predstavqaju zemqu.1) jer iz utrobe verujuñih „poteñi ñe rijeke vode æive“ (Jn.62 Teoloãki åasopis. na ikoni Pedesetnice. 22. Templ. u najviãem i najsvetijem delu. Na vrhu ikone. Æitije svetog Simeona i Save. zemaqsku Crkvu saåiwenu od qudi. Kada se qudi „obuku u bele haqine“ biñe poput Hrista i æiveñe u sozercawu Wegovog lika „u duãi naslikana“51. Bogdanoviñ. belog goluba i/ili plamene zrake koji se spuãtaju na apostole i sve prisutne.38). 7. 2009: 116. 51 52 Vidi: Teodosije Hilandarac. Na ikoni su prema Templovom tumaåewu „liånosti i dogaœaji u potpunosti predstavqeni u vaseqenskom skladu a ne na zemqi“52.

. Crkva gradi odraz nebeskog carstva na zemqi. Triipostasno i Svemoñno. ispuwenu blagodañu Svetog Duha. Tako se otkriva i potvrœuje promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta. ovo javqawe ne deãava se po suãtini veñ blagodati i sili i energiji koja je zajedniåka Ocu. „primamo sva crkvena predawa pisana i nepisana. i tako daqe) zajedno odraz na zemaqskom planu Boæanskog Trojedinog æivota“55. verujuñi u Jedno Boæanstvo. Jer kako kaæe sveti Grigorije Palama. U woj Boæanstvo obitava telesno kao ãto je obitavalo u oboæenom Hristovom åoveãtvu“53.39) delovawe Svetog Duha je dobilo novu dimenziju u odnosu na prethodno delovawe kada je „govorio kroz proroke“. manastiri. Tako su „struktura kanona i naåelo celokupne hriãñanske strukture (crkvene zajednice. Uspenski. omivena i proåiãñena krvqu Hristovom)“ jer „Hristos uzlazi da bi siãao Duh Sveti“54. 2008: 208. jednu Crkvu. Stoga se „poklawamo ikoni opisanoga. Dogaœajem silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispuweno je obeñawe Spasiteqa i krãtewe Crkve ogwem jer kada je Hristos proslavqen (Jn. Loski. Sina Boæijeg. i po svemu onome sa åime Bog zajedniåari i po blagodati se sjediwuje sa svetim anœelima i qudima. Sinu i Duhu. 7. i pre svih najtajanstveniju i sveãtenu Sluæbu i Priåeãñe i Sabrawe (litugrijsko)“. „On silazi u svet i Crkvu (koja je iskupqena. koje 53 54 55 Loski. U skladu sa izdvojenom prirodom i liånostima Svete Trojice. Tako apostoli åine jedno telo. za nas ovaploñenoga. Loski. ponosno prenoseñi poklowewe na prvolik“. Tako je Crkva „punota buduñi da je Duh Sveti oæivotvorava i ispuwava Boæanstvom. 2003: 120-122. 2003: 119.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 63 Zakquåak Æivot Crkve je suãtinski povezan sa dogmom Trojedinog Boga.

Kompozicija. perspektiva. boæanskog sveta vidqivim sredstvima komunikacije. Tako se elementi kompozicije poistoveñuju sa reåima iz svetih spisa a gledawe ikone postaje åitawe koje vodi ka sozercawu Lika Gospodweg. eshatoloãki smisao. . N° 9 nikako ne gubi jedinstvenost i prostotu zbog sila i Ipostasi (svojih)“56. 56 Sveti Grigorije Palama. Na ikoni. to jest prikazivawu viãeg. svaki kompozicijski element ima svoj naroåit. Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. (1978: 473-477). boja.64 Teoloãki åasopis.

Pavle 2009. Tomislav 2005. Œuro 1998. Beograd: Jugoslovensko biblijsko druãtvo.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 65 Bibliografija Bogdanoviñ. Biblija ili Sveto Pismo Staroga i Novoga Zavjeta. Vizije u hriãñanstvu. Weitzmann. Azbuånik pravoslavne ikonografije i graditeqstva. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. Daniåiñ. Kurt 1976. . Evdokimov. Beograd: Muzej SPC. Princeton: Princeton University. Umetnost ikone: teologija lepote. Jovanoviñ. Loski. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Vladimir 2003. Dimitrije 1963. Beograd: Prosveta. Benc. Megatrend Univerziteta i Visoka ãkola – Akademija Srpske Pravoslavne Crkve za umetnost i konservaciju. Jovanoviñ. Srpska kwiæevna zadruga i Prosveta. Stare srpske biografije. Apokrifi novozavetni. Zoran 2005. Beograd. Ernst 2006. Ogled o mistiåkom bogoslovqu Istoåne Crkve. Beograd: Fakultet za kulturu i medije. Beograd: Åigoja.

66

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Mediñ, Milorad 2002. Stari slikarski priruånici. Beograd: Republiåki zavod za zaãtitu spomenika kulture i Druãtvo prijateqa Svete Gore Atonske. Naniñ, Mirko 2005. Tropari i kondaci za sve dane u godini. Ãid: Srpska pravoslavna zajednica Ãid. Ozoqin, Nikolaj 2007. Pravoslavna ikona Pedesetnice: poreklo i razvoj wenih konstitutivnih tema u Bizantijskoj epohi. Begrad-Ãibenik: Istina, izdavaåka ustanova Eparhije dalmatinske. Ocokoqiñ, Jugoslav 2004. Ikona: åitawe, pisawe i sozercawe sa teologijom ikone. Beograd: Jugoslav Ocokoqiñ. Palama, Grigorije 1978. „Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere“. prev. Atanasije Jevtiñ. Beograd: Teoloãki pogledi 4. Skalova, Zuzana, Gawdat Gabra 2006. Icons of the Nile Waley. Egypt: Egyptian International Pub lishing Company – Longman. Templ, Riåard 2009. Ikone i tajnoviti izvori hriãñanstva. Kragujevac: Kaleniñ. Tomadakis, Nikolaos B., Konstantinos A. Manafis, Grossmann Peter, at al. 1990. Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. ed. Manafis A. Konstantinos. Athens: George A. Christopoulos, John. C. Bastias.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

67

Uspenski, Leonid 2000. Teologija ikone. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Uspenski, Leonid, Vladimir Loski 2008. Smisao ikone. Jasen: Nikãiñ.

68

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Symbolism of the Feast of Pentecost: Written and Painted Sources
Resume This paper will discuss the symbolism of the Christian feast of Pentecost, through the written and painted sources. On the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles and restores the unity of God and people through the spiritual building of the Church. Also, this holiday is especially important because the Holy Spirit descends on each member of the Church and to everyone gives special gifts. The event in which the apostles speak different languages and understand each other is especially important. The particular gift, that occurs through the descend of the Holy Spirit is described in the feast’s icons of Pentecost. In accordance with fact that the picture through the history of Christianity had halting, but a very important role, in transmission of Tradition, emphasis of this work is on research of symbolism of single art elements (color, geometry, perspective), their origin and their role in transmitting of the invisible world by material means on the icon of Pentecost. Keywords: the Pentecost, icons, symbolism, the Holy Spirit.

69 Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu nikola.knezevic@nsts-online.org UDK 233.14 Primljeno: 01.04.2010 Prihvañeno: 05.04.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

KOMPARATIVNI PRISTUP: PECCATUM ORIGINALE
Rezime Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju poimanja termina prvorodnog greha (lat. peccatum originale) pre svega, u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije (lat. Imago Dei) u åoveku, odnosno, u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada, ili, taånije, u odnosu na ono ãto je od od te slike ostalo. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj, Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Rimokatoliåka tradicija insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena, da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena, ali da nije i izgubljena. Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj, rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju poimanja ljudske prirode, åijoj razlici doprinosi i uvoœenje pojma donum superadditum. Nasuprot tome, u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koja podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. Kljuåne reåi: praroditeljski greh, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

Pad bi bio neobjaãnjiv da smo zadræali to stanje moralnog savrãenstva. bezazlen. svetlosti æivota. svetosti i blaæenstva. bezgreãnosti. Takoœe. bez moguñnosti da umre 4 veñ da je imalo moguñnost da ne umre 5 . i pali u greh. åovek je od Boga primio fiziåku i duhovnu snagu neophodnu za njegovo ostvarenje. Stalna komunikacija sa Bogom bi omoguñila stvarnu besmrtnost . Netruleænost i besmrtnost telesna ne znaåi nuæno da je. Stvoren po liku Boæijem. 5. prvobitno stanje je obeleæeno savrãenim skladom samoga åoveka.6 Naãi praroditelji nisu ostali u stanju prvobitne pravednosti.dar Boæije blagodati. telo bilo besmrtno.åovek nije sagreãio. njegov odnos sa Bogom i uslove u kojima je æiveo. nameñe ideju da su njegove duhovne sile.da bi vladao zemljom i svim ãto je na zemlji. non posse mori posse non mori Isto. bile odreœene za slobodno razvijanje u smeru savrãenstva. bestrasan. nego su prestupivãi zapovest Boæiju. Sablaænjivi zmijin predlog izaziva u Evinoj duãi oseñaj gordosti koji brzo prerasta u bogoboraåko raspoloæenje kojem se Eva radoznalo podaje i 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vidi: Popoviñ: 1980: 260. 2003: 2. Åovekov zadatak nam je nagoveãten u åinjenici da je stvoren po obliåju Boæijem . N° 9 Posedovanjem lika Boæijeg.2 Imajuñi u vidu svojstva kojima je åovek bio obdaren. åovek je izaãao iz ruke Boæije neporoåan. Tudoran. prema tome. åovek je postavljen iznad prirode i predodreœen je da bude posrednik izmeœu Tvorca i beslovesnih biña.3 Ipak. otpali od Boga. bezgreãan. po prirodi. zaslaœena prividnom naivnoãñu. Ova obmana je izvedena spretno. åovekovo savrãenstvo je bilo relativno. Isto. tamu i smrt. buduñi neokrnjene grehom. 6 . åovekovog odnosa sa Bogom i åovekovog odnosa sa beslovesnom prirodom.1 Stvoren radi visokog i uzviãenog cilja. i telesno savrãenstvo prvozdanog åoveka jeste bilo samo relativno.70 Teoloãki åasopis.

1998: 138. odnosno sastavni deo åovekove duhovne i moralne prirode.10 Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj. Prvobitna pravednost nije bila organski. Prvorodni greh je oduzeo Adamu prvobitnu pravednost (lat. da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena. ali da nije i izgubljena. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Obraz Boæiji u åoveku nije u potpunosti izgubljen. tako je zavist njegova prema åoveku.8 Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju åovekovog pada. Vidi: Isto. u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije u åoveku. poseban dodatak åovekovim prirodnim silama (lat. Prvorodni greh nije u potpunosti uniãtio slobodu åoveka te u njemu i dalje postoji odreœeno dobro kao i sposobnost upravljanja prema dobrom. veñ spoljaãni dar blagodati. Vidi: Tudoran.“9 Katoliåka crkva insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena. donum superadditum).7 Ovom svetopisamskom istinom o poreklu i uzroku greha i zla u svetu proæeta je sræ Svetog predanja. veñ „zatamnjen. taånije. . odnosno. justitia originalis). 273. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj.11 7 8 9 10 11 Vidi: Popoviñ. ali nije naudio njegovoj prirodi. u odnosu na ono ãto je od nje ostalo. rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju ljudske prirode. ili. u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada. 14. Vidi: Franc Courth. Vidi: Justin Popoviñ. Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Kao ãto je zavist œavola prema Bogu bila uzrok njegovom padu na nebu. Æena navodi muæa da je u tome sledi i on dobrovoljno jede zabranjeni rod.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 71 svesno krãi Boæiju zapovest. jer prirodna teænja razuma i volje prema istini i dobru nije u potpunosti iãåezla. pre svega. bila povod pogubnog pada prvih ljudi. kao bogolikom sazdanju Boæijem. 302. 272.

. nemoguñe da se okrene Bogu svojom voljom. poãto je greh zaposeo sve pore njegovog biña. ãiri se.13 Luter je smatrao da je åoveku. nije sigurno da se ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga.“15 Reformisano veroispovedanje iz 17. Bente: 1921: XVIII poglavlje. 1989: 90.17 Svetopisamsko poimanje praroditeljskog greha U Starom zavetu ne postoji eksplicitno definisan praroditeljski greh. N° 9 Nasuprot tome. i poprima sve veñe dimenzije ostavljajuñi posledice zbog kojih trpi sav ljudski rod. odnosno. ali nije uniãtena. meœutim.“16 Ipak. 138. ali nije nestala. kasniji uticaj greha na celo stvorenje. Imago Dei je potamnela. slava Boæija je okrnjena.72 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Franc Courth. sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina kaæe „da je åoveku bez Boæije pomoñi nemoguñe åak i poåeti svoj put ka Bogu. . F. 1948: 644. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Vidi: Augustine. veka. 1989: 90.. Veñ se na poåetku starozavetne poruke nazire dinamika razvoja „grehovne sile“ koja pri padu prvosazdanih ljudi dobija svoj zamajac. u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koje prvobitno potiåe od blaæenog Avgustina12 i podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. sa viãe optimizma. iako tekst implicira njegovu pojavu i posledice. Vidi: Bloesch. tvrdi sledeñe: „U åoveku je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo koje u njemu åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. pogreãno je reñi da je iz åoveka u potpunosti iãåezla prirodna dobrota ili sloboda. Kanoni sa sinode u Dortrehtu 1618-1619: 2007: 51. Vidi: Bloesch.14 Augzburãko veroispovedanje. niti je njime moguñe obratiti mu se.

5-6.23 Misao o univerzalnosti istorije spasenja u Hristu i o nesretnom dogaœaju sa Adamom izrazio je idejom korporativne specifiånosti. 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 Moj 1. . 2003: 166. Rim 3. a Adamova greãka ukazuje na to da kada je greh u pitanju. Stihovima iz 1Moj 3 se dokazivao „uzroåni greh“ kojim je greh uãao u svet (lat. sagreãili (1Moj 6. peccatum originale originans). i bi mu æao u srcu. 23). 167.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 73 Uporedimo reåi Stvoritelja na vrhuncu ãestodneva: „Tada pogleda Bog sve ãto je stvorio. meœu ljudima nema razlike: „Kao ãto je napisano: Nema ni jednog pravednog.“ 18 sa kasnijom konstatacijom: „I Gospod videñi da je nevaljalstvo ljudsko veliko na zemlji. Vidi: Isto. druãtvene posledice greha i liånu odgovornost poåinioca – svaki greh je greh protiv Saveza i liåni greh protiv Boga. U proroåkoj i mudrosnoj literaturi Starog zaveta se postepeno razvija individualistiåko shvatanje greha i njegovih posledica. peccatum originale originatum).21 Pojam praroditeljskog greha je neãto odreœeniji u Novom zavetu. 21. 46. i da su sve misli srca njihovog svagda samo zle. 1 Moj 6. dobro beãe veoma. Ps 13. bez izuzetaka.“ 19 Postoje mnoga mesta u Starom zavetu koja direktno svedoåe o tome da su svi ljudi. odnosno. Savremena egzegeza ovakvo tumaåenje smatra spornim zbog nedostatka konteksta.“22 Apostol Pavle se ovde bavi Adamom jer mu on otvara moguñnost da govori o uticaju Hrista koji je sveopãti. 31. pokaja se Gospod ãto je stvorio åoveka na zemlji. Adam predstavlja jedinstvo ljudskog roda. 9-10. Vidi: Nemet. Jer 13. 5 (7) definisao dogmu o praroditeljskom grehu. 2-3. 1Car 8. kao i greh. dok se stihom iz Psalma dokazivalo greãno stanje sveta i åoveka (lat. Po apostolu Pavlu. 15. Starozavetna poruka jasno naglaãava dvojnost greha. Uporedi: Rim 5.20 Tridentski sabor je tekstovima iz 1Moj 3 i Ps 51. i gle. 5 i 8.

patnje. 1998:108.26 Takvo stanje savrãentsva podrazumeva i åinjenicu da je åovek sazdan kao biñe kojem su bile strane bolesti.24 Istoåna tradicija Pravoslavno uåenje stanje prvosazdanog åoveka objaãnjava na ovaj naåin: „Stanje nevinosti ili odsustva greha … nepoznavanje greha ili nedostatak æelje za ogrehovljenjem… Pre no ãto je sagreãio Adam je bio u stanju harmonije. „izumitelja zla“ kako ga joã naziva Sv. ali sa moguñnoãñu da sagreãi. Zavist jednog od nekada najveñih meœu heruvimima. on joã uvek nije bio moralno dovrãena liånost.74 Teoloãki åasopis. Adam nije imao apsolutno spoznajno i moralno savrãenstvo. svojom 24 25 26 27 Vidi: Courth. njegova volja savrãenu pravednost i dobrotu. 4. bez sklonosti ka grehu. bol. U ovome se najbolje oåitava veliåina Boæije intervencije i veliåina Stvoritelja samog. Naæalost. Njegov um je posedovao brojna znanja. kada najviãem åinu svoga stvaranja daje moguñnost da se okrene od njega.27 Na kraju. slobodno biñe sa moguñnoãñu da odluåuje. N° 9 Adam je predak apostola naroda i tip greãnog åoveåanstva. a samim tim slobodnim kada je u pitanju volja. ujedinjenog savrãenstva i pravde. Prvi åovek je bio savrãen u tom smislu ãto je i njegovo duhovno i fiziåko bilo na najviãem stepenu i omoguñavalo mu je da ispuni svoj zadatak. Prevashodno. koje su postale delom åovekove prirode nakon njegovog pada u greh i koje su posledica ogrehovljenja same åovekove prirode. kao biñe koje je posedovalo slobodnu volju.“25 Stvorio ga je Bog. dakle. . slobodna volja ljudskog biña postaje oruœe njegovog ropstva. Grigorije Niski. Vidi: Tudoran. 6. 2001: 208 (poglavlje 26). kako uma. kao ãto je Hrist predvodnik izbavljenih. Grigorije Niski. åovek je stvoren kao slovesno. Vidi: Isto. Sv. tako i volje.

287. . œavolje iskuãenje je uspelo zbog toga ãto je on znao (ili je pretpostavljao) ãta se nalazi u srcu samoga åoveka. 28 29 30 31 Serafim Rouz. on ne podrazumeva apriori i „nasleœenu krivicu“. Naslednost prvorodnog greha sveopãta je. Iako su praroditelji traæili opravdanje za sebe u nagovoru zmije. iskvarenost volje. mnogo viãe im je naãkodila njihova vlastita æelja nego nagovor zmije. stradanja i smrt. Åovekov Pad: 3. jer niko od ljudi nije izuzet od toga osim Bogoåoveka. kao kategorija i zakon greha koji æivi u åoveku i dejstvuje u njemu i kroz njega. 295. dakle. preneo je svoju palu prirodu na svoje potomstvo.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 75 ruãilaåkom tendencijom uspeva da zavede ljudsko biñe i tako dovede do promene njegove same prirode . Åak i da kuãaå nije doãao. ali se ta krivica ne prenosi na potomke. Sveti Jefrem Sirijski kaæe da je Adam u sebi posedovao potencijal za ovakav ishod: „Reå iskuãenja ne bi odvela u greh one ãto su iskuãavani da kuãaåa nije rukovodila njihova sopstvena æelja. greh koji je uåinio otac ljudskog roda. veñ podrazumeva osobinu svakog pojedinca da se lakãe upravlja prema zlu nego prema dobru. osiromaãenja i smrtnosti.30 Na ceo ljudski rod kao deo izmenjene åovekove prirode prenose se i sve posledice pada: unakaæenost lica Boæijeg. Buduñi da je Adam bio otac celog åoveåanstva. Vidi: Popoviñ. Ovakav prestup Boæije zapovesti poslediåno postaje grehom celog ljudskog roda. 290. Vidi: Isto. oskrnavljenost srca. Vidi: Isto.otuda i naziv prvorodni ili praroditeljski greh. Najzad. da prvosazdani ljudi snose krivicu za grehopad. projavljuje se u svima bez izuzetka kao neko æivo greãno naåelo. Gospoda Isusa Hrista. drvo bi svojom lepotom uvelo njihova srca u rat. samim tim i greh sa svim svojim posledicama i kaznama . bolesti. potiåuñi od Adama. Jasno je.njenog ograniåenja. pomraåenje razuma.29 Greãnost ljudske prirode.31 Vaæno je reñi da u pravoslavnoj antropologiji nasledni greh nema Avgustinske implikacije. to jest."28 Tako nastaje prvi greh.

2001: 121. tvrdi pravoslavni bogoslov Kalistos Ver. krenuli su putem otuœenosti od Boga i sopstvene prirode.“34 Posledice pada ljudskog roda bile su fiziåkog i moralnog karaktera. izgubio je lik netruleænog Boga i kroz greh se obukao u lik truleæi i praãine. Vidi: Tudoran. ljudska biña su postala podloæna bolesti. Åovek je postao predmet unutraãnjeg otuœenja. U fiziåkom smislu. Vidi: Ware. priroda viãe ne sluæi åoveku.36 „Tako je åovek. liãio sebe svog dostojanstva upavãi u blato greha. podelu unutar samoga sebe i drugih ljudi. veñ se prostire i na beslovesne æivotinje i na beslovesnu prirodu. Liãen zajednice sa Bogom. starosti i na kraju smrti. 35 Kako je to svojevremeno govorio Sv. U moralnom smislu. veñ teæi da je zavede. 1979: 60. sa Bogom i sa prirodom: telo se viãe ne pokorava duãi. Grigorije Niski. taãtina i depresija su postale svakodnevnica ljudskog roda. N° 9 Prestupanjem zapovesti prvosazdani ljudi podlegli su Sataninoj obmani i promaãili svoje prvobitno naznaåenje. 1979: 59. 8. Greh naruãava harmoniju åoveka sa samim sobom. 1980: 282. Romanidis. otuœen tako od samoga sebe i oslabljene volje. åini to sa naporom. Vidi: Sv. frustracije. Grigorije Niski. postao je neprijatelj samome sebi. Umesto da igra ulogu posrednika i ujedinitelja. „pad nije ograniåen samo na ljudski rod. veliko i dragoceno stvorenje.“ 37 32 33 34 35 36 37 Ware. åovek postaje rob greha.76 Teoloãki åasopis. (17:2) Popoviñ. bolu. on je prouzrokovao podelu. . sliåno onima koji su iz nesmotrenosti upali u blato i ukaljali lice svoje. i do oblaåenja u smrtnost. 2001: 40.33 Pad ljudskog biña ontoloãki menja celokupno stvorenje. te ih åak ni poznanici ne mogu raspoznati. kod ljudskog biña je doãlo do izopaåenja i gubitka dostojanstva koje je bilo ravno anœeoskom.32 Umesto do savrãentstva i oboæenja. podelu izmeœu sebe i prirodnog sveta. a kada mu sluæi.

posle pada. Naglaãavajuñi ovo. Romanidis. tada se stvara bezizlaz u vezi sa prenoãenjem smrti i propadljivosti na potomke Adamove. åoveåanstvo po svaku cenu mora biti krivac za pad. veñ. pod tim predpostavkama. vrlo je vaæno reñi da nije Bog tvorac smrti veñ œavo. lik Boæiji u åoveku nije uniãten. 1980: 282. kako je to rekao ava Justin: „duboko povreœen. ali. saåuvala dobrota Boæija. Na osnovu ljudske istorije.“38 Posledica toga je i fiziåka smrt. zaklju38 39 40 Serafim Rouz. . Za razliku od rimokatoliåke antropologije koja unakaæenje lika vidi kao gubitak åovekove „prvobitne pravednosti“. natprirodnog i inputiranog dara koji na taj naåin i nije åinio deo ogranske prirode åoveka.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 77 Poãto se priroda ljudskog biña ontoloãki promenila. Sveti Jovan Zlatousti govori. to je protivno ljudskoj prirodi kojoj je mnogo lakãe da se rukovodi upravo suprotnim. kada je u pitanju pravoslavna antropologija. primili smrtnu presudu. Romanidis kaæe sledeñe: „Ako se jednom prihvati da propadljivost i smrt predstavljaju kaznu od Boga za sve ljude. Da bi se. pomraåen i unakaæen.“40 Ljudsko biñe je i dalje sposobno da se opredeljuje prema dobru. U odnosu na poreklo smrti. Popoviñ.“39 Ono ãto pravoslavnu antropologiju åini autentiånom i najoptimistiånijom jeste upravo njeno poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku nakon grehopada. u pravoslavnoj antropologiji. i ljudski rod je doæiveo fiziåku smrt. i manje optimistiånih tumaåenja protestanskog stanoviãta „potpune iskvarenosti“. Åovekova volja ostaje samo uslovno. umrli. Åovekov Pad: 8. delimiåno slobodna. veñ naprotiv. Bog je dopustio smrt ne zbog nekakvog kaænjeniåkog raspoloæenja boæanske pravednosti. odnosno. pre svega. ipak. zbog boæanske ljubavi prema åoveku. postali smrtni i moæemo reñi. 2001: 234. o duhovnoj smrti kada kaæe za prvosazdane ljude da su „u trenutku kad su åuli reåi: prah si i u prah ñeã se vratiti.

19 . Kada se razmatra problematika pada ljudskog biña.20. meœutim. na prvi pogled. Åak i u palom svetu. te mu je. omoguñeno da stupi u zajedniãtvo sa Bogom. Protestanska antropologija je sliåna pravoslavnoj u odnosu na prirodu åoveka. Vidi: Ware. Boæanski lik u åoveku. povratak na poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku je neizbeæan i prvenstveno.78 Teoloãki åasopis. ukljuåujuñi i slobodu izbora koju on ima. 41 42 Rim 1. ostao je zamuñen ali ne i uniãten. Apostol Pavle. odnosno. 62. Sagledañemo poimanje pada ljudskog biña u greh i njegove posledice sa stanoviãta rimokatoliåke i protestanske antropologije. Pravoslavna i rimokatoliåka antropologija se podudaraju u tvrdnji da je lik Boæiji u åoveku posle grehopada osiromaãen. 41 Sumirajuñi stanoviãte pravoslavne tradicije po ovom pitanju. ali u manjoj meri. N° 9 åujemo da je åoveku data moguñnost bogopoznanja kako o tome svedoåi i Sv. åovek je joã uvek sposoban za poærtvovanje i samilost. . a razlikuje se od nje u odnosu na posledice pada i dalje soterioloãke implikacije. kako to tvrde neka pesimistiånija kalvinistiåka stanoviãta.42 Zapadna tradicija U prethodnim poglavljima je veñ bilo reåi o rimokatoliåkom. neophodan. Kalistos Ver kaæe da ona (pravoslavna tradicija) bez umanivanja samih posledica pada ne smatra da je pad rezultirao „totalnom iskvarenoãñu”. prema tome. Razmatrajuñi åovekov pad i posledice pada iz perspektive zapadne hriãñanske tradicije i poredeñi ga sa stanoviãtem pravoslavne antropologije. na razliåite naåine gledaju na prirodu ljudskog biña. åime se podrazumeva da on i dalje poseduje odreœeno bogopoznanje. po milosti Boæijoj. protestantskom pogledu na imago Dei. nailazimo na manje ili viãe opreåna stanoviãta.

2003: 174. Po Pelagiju. 108. Vidi: Courth.46 a kako drugi smatraju. s obzirom da greh zavisi iskljuåivo od slobodne volje. greh nije neãto supstancijalno i ne pripada prirodi åoveka. u 43 44 45 Vidi: Isto. Razvio je teoriju o poreklu i naslednosti greha. to jest.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 79 Crkvena tradicija Joã krajem drugog veka. bez uticaja Boæanskog. åovek je i dalje u moguñnosti da bira izmeœu dobra i zla. Ovom temom su se bavili joã i Sv. imaju nasledni greh od kojeg se oslobaœaju krãtenjem. dovodeñi ga. onda su svi greãni i svi imaju potrebu za otkupljenjem i spasenjem. åovek moæe biti bez greha. prema Avgustinu je u poremeñenom odnosu prema Bogu. boreñi se protiv markionizma i gnosticizma. greh je potpuno sluåajna trenutna pojava koja niåe jedino u oblasti slobodne volje i to poãto se u njoj razvije sloboda koja ga jedina moæe proizvesti. O ovome vidi viãe u Justin: 1980: 301-307. Nemet.45 Avgustin produbljuje teoloãki smisao pokvarenosti åoveka. Meliton pod nasledstvom podrazumeva nesretno stanje åoveka koje ga podjarmljuje i zavodi na greh. po uåenju Pelagija. Irinej Lionski i Tertulian: polazili su od istine da je otkupljenje potrebno svima. do potpune pokvarenosti åoveka.43 Veñ u prvim vekovima. jer ako je Hrist umro za sve. te. 1980: 300. Pelagije je engleski monah iz åetvrtog veka åije je uåenje proglaãeno jeretiåkim. kako jedni smatraju. Greh je ono ãto se moæe izbeñi. prema tome.44 U jeku rasprave blaæenog Avgustina sa Pelagijem. do taåke kristalizacije. Meliton Sardski govori o grehu koji je ljudski rod nasledio od Adama. jer iako moralno nevina. do suprotne krajnosti. shvatanje spasenja i praksa krãtenja su bili uobiåajeno povezani s priznavanjem odreœenog greãnog stanja u kojem se åovek nalazi. Bit praroditeljskog greha. Vidi: Nemet: 2003: 173. 46 47 .47 Avgustin polazi od razmiãljanja o crkvenoj praksi krãtenja dece koja podrazumeva da su deca greãnici. 110. Vidi: Justin. Ãtaviãe.

116. praroditeljski greh podrazumeva. Sabor je pre svega posmatrao odnos ranjene prirode ljudskog biña i milosti spasenja.52 Nesumnjivo je da je na oba sabora Avgustinovo shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. 2003: 206. . ne moæemo pozvati na odgovornost. Na crkvenom saboru je bilo prihvañeno nekoliko kanona i odluka koje su se odnosile na pojam i shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. zbog Adamove neposluãnosti. premda ga ona uslovljava. ne samo nekom opãtom pokvarenoãñu koja mu prethodi.48 Hiponski biskup.80 Teoloãki åasopis. Prades. Vidi: Scola. 114. 48 49 50 51 52 Vidi: Courth.51 Sabori u Kartagini i Oranæu Teoloãka rasprava sa Pelagijem i njegovim uåenjem dovela je do sazivanja crkvenog sabora afriåkih crkava 418. Marengo. Vidi: Courth. i za koju ga. Sabor na kojem se dalje razvijalo stanoviãte zapadne crkve o praroditeljskom grehu bio je sabor u Oranæu 529. 1998: 111.“ 50 Kao takav.“ tako i kaznu koju je Stvoritelj.49 Avgustinova nauka o praroditeljskom grehu suãtinski se svodi na åinjenicu da åovek „dolazi na svet obeleæen. godine u Kartagini. 207. nametnuo svim ljudima. na osnovu uverenja o greãnom stanju u kojem se nalazi svaki Adamov potomak. povezano s duãevnom smrñu. Vidi: Isto. imalo presudan znaåaj i veliki uticaj. kako „razjedninjenje åoveka. veñ i realno greãnim biñem koje u njemu postoji i kojim se unapred odreœuje za veånu osudu. godine na koji ñe se skoro hiljadu godina kasnije pozivati na Tridentskom saboru. koje je na ovim saborima i zvaniåno prihvañeno. N° 9 oholosti i samoljublju. govori o poæudi koja se smatra nasledstvom od prvosazdanog åoveka i samim tim i izvorom liånih greha. Isto.

Takoœe. Prades. umrtvljenost ljudske prirode. Svaka poæuda. sve ljude stavlja u poloæaj neprijateljstva prema Bogu. 120. Praroditeljski greh predstavlja. na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha se gleda i kao na moralnu solidarnost ljudskog roda sa Adamom. 121. Vidi. definisao je praroditeljski greh kao sintezu dva elementa: potpunog gubitka54 izvorne ili prvobitne pravednosti55 kao formalnoga elementa i poæude kao materijalnog elementa. koja. 1954: 124. prepoznaje u prisutnosti poæude. poåevãi od Adama. Isto. Marengo. Vidi: Fairweather.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 81 Nakon sabora u Oranæu vekovima nije postojalo veñe interesovanje za problematiku praroditeljskog greha ali je izvesno interesovanje u srednjem veku formiralo stav da se prisutnost sluåajne pokvarenosti ljudske naravi. kako ga joã Akvinski naziva. predstavlja gubitak sklada duãevnih elemenata .56 Formalna priroda praroditeljskog greha je odreœena njegovim uzrokom koji je suprotan prvobitnoj milosti koja se sastoji iz posluãnosti ljudskog biña Boæijoj volji. kao materijalni element. Vidi: Isto. Gubitak prvobitne milosti predstavlja formalnu prirodu praroditeljskog greha. Vidi: Isto. 53 Toma Akvinski U 13. sledeñi Anselma iz Aoste i koristeñi se skolastiåkom terminologijom. Toma Akvinski ulogu prvobitne milosti vidi kao ravnoteæu 53 54 55 56 57 Vidi: Scola.Akvinski razum i intelekt smatra duãevnim elementima koji su usmereni prema dobru dok je „niæi“ deo duãe usmeren ka zlu. 208. 124. poãto je Adam uzor åovekovog morala i predstavnika celog åoveåantsva. . veku jedan on najveñih teologa katoliåke crkve. Toma Akvinski. 57 Vaæno je spomenuti i ulogu „prvobitne“ pravednosti u åoveku.

302. . njegovim umom. N° 9 izmeœu duãevnih elemenata (razum. ili je samo izmenjena njena moguñnost da se usmerava ka dobrom. problematika praroditeljskog greha dobija drugaåiji naglasak. Treñi ålan treñeg poglavlja kanona sa sabora u Dortu glasi ovako: 58 59 60 61 62 Vidi: Isto. Isto: 96. stanje bez blagodati?59 Tomistiåko viœenje praroditeljskog greha je nesumljivo ostavilo traga na veliki Sabor koji ñe uslediti nekoliko vekova kasnije. intelekt i niæi delovi duãe). zakljuåujemo da justitia originalis po Akvinskom nije bila organski deo ljudske prirode. u jeku reformacije. Da li bi bilo potrebno stavljati elemente u ravnoteæu da „niæi“ deo duãe nije i pre Adamovog pada bio usmeren ka zlu? Da li je doctor Angelicus ukazao na manihejski dualizam ljudske prirode i pre njegovog pada. odnosno.60 Luter je opisao åoveka zarobljenog grehom kao incurvatus-a (savijen prema sebi). kako bi onda priroda nakon grehopada mogla da ostane u neizmenjenom stanju? Da li to znaåi da se ljudsko biñe nakon grehopada vraña u svoje prirodno stanje. pioniri reformacije. Vidi: Bloesh. Greh zahvata sve pore ljudskog biña i onemoguñava mu da se okrene Bogu sopstvenom voljom. 1989: 91. po Akvinskom. bez Boæije intervencije.62 Ljudsko biñe se raœa pokvareno. i svim njegovim delima. nakon grehopada povreœena. Luter i Kalvin gledali su na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha kao na silu koja je u potpunosti ovladala ljudskim biñem. i na hamartiologiju Katoliåke crkve upãte. Vidi: Calvin. veku.58 Imajuñi ovo u vidu. Reformacija U 16. jer ako jeste. Sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina. 1957: 261.61 a njegovu pokvarenost kao „duboku i zlu“. Vidi: Popoviñ.82 Teoloãki åasopis. 126. srcem. Nije jasno da li je priroda åoveka.

Concupiscense. civilis justitia). 1959: 500.64 Reåi osmog poglavlja Drugog Helvetskog veropispovedanja imaju radikalniji prizvuk: „Puni zloñe (=ljudi). odnosno. nesposobni za svako spasonosno delo.com/chr/2helvcnf. 1953.“63 83 Luter je definisao znaåenje reåi concupiscentia neãto drugaåije. nepoverenja. veñ je samo potamnela.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet „Svi ljudi su zaåeti u grehu i raœaju se kao sinovi gneva. da krãtenje ne poniãtava krivicu praroditeljskog greha. veñ je u nemoguñnosti da usmerava åoveka da iãta uradi u pogledu svog spasenja bez uticaja Boæanske spasonosne milosti. http://www.“65 Bruner smatra da je greh promenio i izopaåio celokupnu ljudsku prirodu. umrli u grehu i robovi greha. Bloesh. 137. suprotno katoliåkom uåenju. veñ poniãtava njegovo pripisivanje åoveku. dodavãi pritom. Barth. Åovek i dalje poseduje takozvanu graœansku pravednost (lat. moguñnost da i dalje razumom u svakodnevnom æivotu 63 64 Kanoni sa sinoda u Dordrechtu.sa- 65 Drugo Helvetsko veroispovedanje. åak ni da mislimo ni o åemu dobrom. Bez milosti Duha Svetoga koji preporaœa. 2007: 50. niti se mogu vratiti Bogu. i time otklanja prokletstvo greha sa ljudskog biña. Vidi: Catholic Encyclopedia. kao izopaåenje ljudske prirode i kao samu suãtinu ljudskog greha.htm 66 67 68 Brunner. niti mogu ispraviti izopaåenu narav i tu doneti poboljãanje. i volja ljudskog biña nije u potpunosti zarobljena.67 a ipak smatra da slika Boæija nije nestala iz åoveka. ne æele. Karl Bart opisuje åoveka kao „korenito i potpuno pokvarenog“. . cred-texts. skloni zlu.68 Takoœe. nismo u moguñnosti sami od sebe da åinimo. osude i mrænje prema Bogu. 94.deo slike Boæije je ostao u ljudskoj prirodi. a ne samo jedan njen deo66 .

ali istovremeno naglaãava da ljudsko biñe nije pokvareno u celosti. Ovakvo tumaåenje radikalizuje pojam potpune pokvarenosti i ne predstavlja suãtinu poruke koju su Kalvin i kasnije sabor u Dortu ispovedali. joã uvek poseduje sposobnost za spoznaju pravednosti. i pokazuje neko nastojanje oko kreposti i discipline. ãto pruæa objaãnjenje za delimiåno Bogopoznanje. te razlikuje izmeœu onoga ãto je åasno i neåasno. Dakle. doprinose tome da ljudsko biñe. kako o tome svedoåi 11. Ona podrazumeva da je svaki deo ljudskog biña oãteñen grehom. odnosno. Ãta je taåno obuhvañeno ovim pojmom? Potrebno je pojaãnjenje ovog pojma da bismo izbegli njegovo radikalno razumevanje. apsolutna pokvarenost implicira iskvarenost ljudskog biña u celini (u njemu ne ostaje ni trunke dobra) i nemoguñnost razlikovanja dobra od zla. Stanoviãte protestanske provenijencije. imago Dei u åoveku jeste oãteñena ali ona joã uvek postoji. za delove mudrosti i istina koje su prisutne u nehriñanskim religijama. a posebno Kalvinizma. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. Opãta milost omoguñava odreœene spoznaje o Bogu. Vidi: Bloesh: 90. Van Baren. kao i imago Dei.71 U ljudskom biñu je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo: „Zahvaljujuñi tome. iako je moguñnost ove spoznaje svedena na minimum. Suãtina razumevanja pojma je u razlikovanju potpunog od apsolutnog. ono åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. ålan Augzburãkog veroispovedanja. N° 9 delimiåno razlikuje dobro i zlo. 1976.“72 Opãta Boæija milost. okrnjena je ali nije uniãtena. Isto.84 Teoloãki åasopis. po pitanju praroditeljskog greha se najåeãñe povezuje sa pojmom potpune pokvarenosti. Herman. 69 Potpuna pokvarenost predstavlja rezultat pada ljudskog biña u greh.70 Nasuprot tome. 50. . kao i za moralna naåela koja se 69 70 71 72 Hanko.

Bloesh.75 Postoji izvesna polarizovanost stanoviãta protestantskih teologa po pitanju shvatanja ljudske prirode posle grehopada. jer celo njegovo biñe odraæava slavu njegovog Stvoritelja.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 85 mogu videti u kulturama najstarijih civilizacija. pokuãava na razliåite naåine ugasiti ovo svetlo.73 Ovo svetlo ipak nije dovoljno za dolaæenje do Bogopoznanja koje vodi ka spasenju: „Ali nije sigurno da se s ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga niti je moguñe njemu se obratiti. 91. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. biti bez isprike pred Bogom“74 Buduñi da je ljudsko biñe delimiåno u moguñnosti da åini dela pravednosti i da doœe do odreœenog stepena moralnih vrlina. i tako dok neãto åini. .. Bloesh. iako je njegova sloboda znaåajno oslabljena i oãteñena. åovek je æalosno okrnjen biser.. iz Boæijeg ugla. ali ne i Boga. 50. Åovek je i dalje odgovoran pred Bogom. 95. odraz Boæijeg biña u åoveku. ali nije uniãten. Ljudskom pravednoãñu se moæe steñi poãtovanje i divljenje ljudi. sva njegova dobra dela zaraæena su greãnom motivacijom ili namisli. naruãen je. ona neprihvatljiva. jer se okrenuo od Boga da bi postigao vlastite ciljeve. savremeni protestanski teolog. jer se åovek ne koristi ispravno prirodnim i graœanskim stvarima. pa samim tim. i zadræati ga u nepravdi. Donald Bloã. Åitav åovek je biser. Govoriti o apsolutnoj iskvarenosti kao opãtem stanoviãtu unutar protestantizma bilo bi suviãe jednostrano. ipak. odliåno je defisao sloæenu postavku kompleskne teoloãke postavke: „Imago Dei. govorio je Luter.“76 73 74 75 76 Vidi: Bloesh: 91. i naprotiv.

184. juna 1546. 2003: 180. nego da je za to potrebna i vera pojedinca. godine.84 Tridentski sabor je bio od velikog znaåaja za poimanje praroditeljskog greha i za razvoj æivota unutar Katoliåke crkve dobar deo Sabora je bio posveñen raspravama o crkvenim tajnama.80 U 3. Apostola Pavla. Luter je smatrao da krãtenje ne briãe u potpunosti praroditeljski greh.78 U 1. sabor naglaãava kako ova sveta tajna u potpunosti i u njegovoj biti briãe praroditeljski greh. vraña åoveka u odnos prijateljstva sa Bogom. kanonu dekreta sabor se odreœuje prema tradiciji anselmovsko – tomistiåkog poimanja praroditeljskog greha kao gubitka iskonske svetosti i pravednosti. 141. Na saboru je 17. sledeñi Sv. Vidi: Courth.79 U 2. kanonu se istiåe vaænost krãtenja dece. 21. Tridentski sabor je naglasio naåelnu neophodnost spasenja svih ljudi 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Danaãnji Trento. 21. kanonu se razmatra Luterovo poimanje krãtenja 81 i nasuprot Luteru. naglaãavaju da se praroditeljski greh prenosi i odnosi na celo åoveåanstvo. godine proglaãeno 6 kanona o praroditeljskom grehu. J. . sredinom 16. veñ potomstvom i poreklom. Nemet. Isto. kanonu se istiåe neutralan stav u odnosu na bezgreãno zaåeñe Majke Boæije. izmeœu 1545-1563. kanonu ispoveda se da se praroditeljski greh ne prenosi oponaãanjem. kanonu crkveni oci.83 U 6. Vidi: Nemet. Ni na jednom drugom saboru do tada nije bilo potrebe za odluåivanjem o tako vaænim pitanjima pod tako teãkim okolnostima. Waterworth: 1848. U 5. prema tome. veka.86 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 Tridentski Sabor Kao odgovor na teoloãke i eklesioloãke izazove Reformacije. odræan je Tridentski77 sabor. Italija. 140.82 Krãtenje. U 4. Vidi: Courth.

ponovo se budi interesovanje za pojmom praroditeljskog greha.85 Savremena shvatanja praroditeljskog greha Krajem 19. ålan 37. u 36.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 87 i znaåaj krãtenja kao svete tajne koja briãe praroditeljski greh (sa ostatkom poæude kao posledice praroditeljskog greha). razvoja prirodnih nauka.86 Joã 1950. novih filosofskih tendencija i poimanja sveta. 143. nauånog objaãnjenja porekla æivota na zemlji i stvaranja sveta uopãte. poziva bogoslove da pokuãaju da pomire nauåno i versko shvatanje porekla æivota. primera radi. godine. U ovakvom druãtvenom stanju svesti mnogi bogoslovi su traæili put ka sintezi verskih istina i dostignuña savremene nauke. ålanu enciklike istiåe da je moguñe da ljudsko telo ima svoj evolutivni poredak. i da se taj greh preneo na celo njegovo potomstvo. i poåetkom 20. odnosno Adam. 2003. Tako se. naizgled suprostavljene strane. Vidi: Isto. veka. kao i zbog mnogih arheoloãkih otkriña. ali da je za stvaranje åovekove duãe zasluæan samo Bog. . papa Pije XII u svojoj enciklici pod nazivom „Humani generis“. Spremao se novi izazov za teologiju: na koji naåin odgovoriti na savremena nauåna pitanja i da li je moguñe pomiriti ove dve. zbog novih erminevtiåkih pristupa. ålan 36. Takoœe. ålanu je potvrœen monogenizam i åinjenica da Adam nije metaforiåki prikaz viãe parova i snaæno je naglaãena åinjenica da je greh poåinio pojedinac. donekle je smanjio teoloãke tenzije izmeœu Katoliåke crkve i Protestantizma. Vidi: Humani Generis.87 U 37. Vidi: Nemet. 185.88 85 86 87 88 Vidi: Isto.

zloupotrebu date slobode i neposluãnost prema Boæijoj zapovesti. 1982: 111. godine. Rahner. joã jednom naglaãava nemoguñnost åoveka da se bori protiv zla u sebi bez Boæije pomoñi. Katehizam definiãe sadræaj praroditeljskog greha kao gubitak poverenja u Stvoritelja. jer ona predstavlja delo liåne slobode pojedinca (=Adama) u kojoj je osoba jedinstvena i niko ne moæe da zauzme njeno mesto. koji je joã jednom naglasio vaænost åinjenice da Adamov greh ne moæe biti inputiran u nas. Vidi: Isto. ali bez Boga. zatvorio Papa Pavle VI. ali ne i u saglasnosti sa njim.91 Veliki znaåaj pojmu praroditeljskog greha nesumnjivo daje i Katehizam Katoliåke Crkve. 90 91 92 93 94 95 Gaudium et Spes. ålan 400. ålan 399. pa se ni liåna Adamova krivica ne moæe na nas preneti. ålan 13. da bude pred Bogom.88 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Isto. Isto.92 Åovek je pao u okrilje greha voœen æeljom „da bude kao Bog. ålan 398. izmeœu svetlosti i tame. velikog bogoslova Katoliåke crkve iz proãloga veka. vaæan dokument sa kraja proãlog veka koji je okupio najvaænije bogoslove Katoliåke crkve.“90 Takoœe.94 Posledice pada i iskvarenosti ljudske prirode prenose se na celokupno stvorenje95 kao i na sve 89 Odræan izmeœu 1962 . N° 9 Drugi vatikanski sabor89 se nije posebno osvrtao na pitanje praroditeljskog greha.1965. otvorio ga je Papa Jovan XXIII. veñ je njegovu formulaciju ostavio u okvirima koji su utvœeni na Tridentskom saboru.“93 Posledice pada su gubitak prvobitne pravednosti i iskvarenost slike Boæije u åoveku. Vidi: Cathehism of Catholic Church. . biña u kome se vodi „dramatiåna borba izmeœu dobra i zla. Vaæno je spomenuti i miãljenje Karla Ranera. Formulacija Sabora o praroditeljskom grehu je kratka i jasna i joã jednom naglaãava podeljenost åovekove prirode. 1993: ålan 397.

ålan 405. moæe. Nema sumnje da savremena sekularizacija druãtva i devijacija moralno – kulturnih normi i obrazaca. u buduñnosti. Nemet.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 89 Adamove potomke.org/cathen/04208a. ljudska priroda nije u potpunosti iskvarena. http://www. odnosno. kao i njihov zajedniåki dijalog sa protestanskim denominacijama. 96 97 Vidi: Isto.99 Izazovi u vidu najnovijih nauånih dostignuña i savremene kulture koja teæi ka tome da trivijalizuje i relazivizuje pojam greha uopãte. izazovi egzistencijalistiåkih. Catholic Encyclopedia. 98 99 . ranjena i teæi97 ka grehu. nihilistiåkih i naturalistiåkih svetonazora zahtevaju ozbiljan pristup i odgovor od strane hriãñanskih provenijencija. stavljaju danaãnje bogoslove pred novi i nimalo lak zadatak. odgovora na izazove koje pruæa postmodernistiåko druãtvo. prihvatajuñi stanoviãta opreåna crkvenom uåenju kao opãte prihvañene normative. on ne nosi i liånu krivicu za Adamov greh.98 Drugim reåima. Latinska reå concupiscentia oznaåa unutraãnju teænju i sklonost ljudskog biña da åini greh.96 Iako se greh prenosi na sve potomke. Niske pobude suprotne razumu. 2003: 189. Vidi o tome viãe: Concupiscense. Pribliæavanje bogoslovskih stavova Pravoslavne i Rimokatoliåke crkve. iako je oãteñena. greh je nasleœen ali ne i poåinjen. kao i generalizovanju jednog svehriãñanskog stanoviãta. ålan 402. da doprinese i novim pogledima na shvatanje praroditeljskog greha.newadvent.htm Vidi: Isto.

Emil 1953. Lutheran Church St. G. N° 9 CITIRANA DELA Bloesh. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Œakovo: Forum bogoslova. Sveti 2001. The Westiminster Press. Grigorije Niski. Philadelphia:The Westminster Press.90 Teoloãki åasopis. Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Krãñanska antropologija. Dau 1921. Brunner. The Humanity of God Richmond. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 2. Barth. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Bente and W. Donald 1989. F. Louis. Donald 1989. M 1954. Calvin. T. Courth. John 1957. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 1. H. Grand Rapids. . Karl 1959. Fairweather. Beograd: Biblioteka Obraz Svetaåki. Concordia Publishing House. The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption. Franc 1998.VA: John Knox Press. Bloesh. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. The Institutes of the Christian Religion. MI. O stvaranju åoveka. A. G. Nature and grace: Selections from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas Philadephia.

Miliñ. Marengo. Herman. Kanoni sa sinode u Dorthrehtu 1618 – 1619.org Nemet. Manastir Kelije. Rahner. adresa: www. Karl 1982. Osijek. New Ed. Van Baren 1976.org Romanidis. Rouz. Teologija stvaranja. Popadiñ. . Novi Sad: Krãñanski centar „Dobroga Pastira“ i Teoloãki fakultet – Novi Sad. Praroditeljski greh. Jasmin. Reformed Free Publishing Association. Prades 2003. Five Points of Calvinism Michigan. Beograd. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 1.verujem. Ladislav 2003. Åovekov Pad. Justin 1980. Dimitrije 2007. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 91 Hanko. Popoviñ. Novi Sad: Beseda. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 2. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Zagreb. Popoviñ. Beograd. Justin 1980. Serafim nd. Fundations of Christian Faith. Manastir Kelije. www. Jovan 2001. Åovjek kao osoba. Herder & Herder. Isidor 2003. Scola. Stanje åoveka pre i posle pada. Zagreb.verujem. Tudoran.

92

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Ware, Kallistos 1979. The Orthodox Way New York, St Vladimirs Seminary Press. Pope, Hugh T. 1910. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. New York, Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Palmieri A. 1911. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI, New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Pope Pius XII 1950. Humani Generis: Encyclical of Popr Pius XII, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/ documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html Pope Poul VI 1965. Gaudium et Spes: Pastoral constitution n the church in the modern world, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/ archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_co ns_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html Waterworth, J. 1848. The Council of Trent: The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, London, Dolman.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

93

PECCATUM ORIGINALE – COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Resume:
There are considerable differencies related to understanding of the original sin in three major christian traditions: Eastern Orthodox, Romancatholic and Protestant. Eastern orthodox anthropology presumes that man did not lost ability of spiritual understanding after the fall, but Gods image (icon) still resides, although corrupted. Roman Catholic tradition insists that human nature is not totally corrupted although ability to do good is deeply weakened, but not completely lost. Although at first glance similar to the Orthodox, Roman Catholic anthropology differs significantly in terms of understanding human nature, mainly because of introduction of the concept donum superadditum. In contrast, prevailing Protestant view stands on pesimistic Augustiniane viewpoint of total depravity. Key words: original sin, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Sergej Beuk Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

95 UDK 22.08:230.11 Primljeno: 5.03.2010 Prihvañeno 10.5.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

OSNOVNE BIBLIJSKE VERE
U radu na temu povezanosti biblijske vere i æivota, autor pruæa moguñe odgovore na pitanja: ãta je religijska vera i koji su elementi biblijskog verskog koncepta? Promiãljajuñi o savremenosti kao o krizi verskog identiteta, rad nam donosi osnovne teoloãke premise hriãñanskog koncepta Boæije egzistencije u svetu kroz pojmove kao ãto su ’’opãta vera’’ i ’’dar vere’’, bez kojih nije moguñe prepoznati Boæiju prisutnost u i meœu ljudima. Takoœe, analizom teksta iz tradicionalnog reformisanog (kalvinistiåkog) dokumenta ’’Belgijskog veroispovedanja’’autor iznosi tezu da hristologija protestantsko – evanœeoskog tipa ima korene u teologiji Æana Kalvina i ostalih reformisanih mislilaca. Kljuåne reåi: Religija, Biblija, vera, Bog, Hristos, Sveti Duh, teologija darova, dar vere.

Uvod
Od kada postoji, ljudsko biñe stoji pred jednim od temeljnih pitanja egzistencije koje glasi: ko je Bog i ãta je religijska vera? Da li je to samo verovanje u natprirodno, nevidljivo i samodovoljno biñe ili se religijsko, kao specifiåno versko iskustvo, moæe konkretizovati? Zaãto postoje razliåiti religijski sistemi i da li svi svedoåe o istom fenomenu? Po åemu je Biblija drugaåija od drugih religijskih spisa?

96

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

U XIX, a naroåito u XX veku moæemo primetiti intelektualnu teænju za sintetizacijom (ili, bolje reñi, sinkretizacijom) razliåitih i åesto nespojivih religiskih sistema: od pojave teozofskog pokreta (kao formalne preteåe Nju Ejdæa), preko antropozofije, spiritizma i razliåitih tantriåkih kultova, pa do pokuãaja hinduizacije Zapada, kroz vaiãnizam – kriãnaizam, meditativne tehnike i jogu, razliåita panteistiåka i/ili pananteistiåka uåenja i intenzive prosvetljenja, savremeni åovek pokuãava da se izbavi iz krletke besmisla, alijenacije i smrti. Meœutim, da li smo posle svega na pragu odgovora? Da li smo sreñniji i bliæi istini? Da li je svet postao bolje mesto za æivot? Veñ dvadeset vekova Hristos poziva ljude na veru pokajanja i preumljenja; na promenu svesti srca i ljubav prema bliænjima reåima: ’’Evo stojim na vratima i kucam: ako ko åuje glas moj i otvori vrata, uñi ñu k njemu i veåerañu s njime, i on sa mnom.’’ (Otk. 3, 20) On åeka da mu otvorimo vrata i pozovemo na agape – gozbu, u sigurnosti iskrene i istinske biblijske vere.

Definicije religijske vere
Ako poœemo od najopãtije definicije da je religija ’’...odnos izmeœu nas i Biña izvan nas’’ (Everett, 2009: 10), onda religijska vera predstavlja specifiåan oblik poverenja/pouzdanja u Vrhovnu Realnost – u Boga ili bogove.1 U tom pravcu idu i sledeñe definicije religijske vere: ona je ’’...verovanje, razumevanje i oboæavanje Vrhovnog Uma i Volje koja usmerava Vaseljenu i odræava moralni odnos sa ljudima.’’ (Marlineau, 1888: 15). Moæemo primetiti da autor smatra da je religijska vera nemoguña bez kognitivnog i etiåkog aspekta, kojima se odgoneta Volja Tvorca i ostvaruje neraskidiv odnos sa tvorevinom. Ona je i voljno istraæivanje Istine,2 unutraãnji
1

Vidi: Schaff, Philip, New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1954.

2 Vidi: Hexham, Irving, Concise Dictionary of Religion, Regent College Press, Vancouver, 1999.

5 . 2009. to je stav åije prihvatanje nije motivisano bilo kakvim unutrasnjim dokazom. s jedne strane. ne zanemarujuñi istoriju religija. mora obuhvatiti razliåitost religijskih iskustava.5 dok Hil. Vidi: Swatos. 2007: 445) I pored iznetog. razvija odnos sa tom stvarnoãñu i 3 4 Vidi: Encyclopedia Britannica.. 1998. istini koju ne sagledavamo sopstvenim razumom i iskustvom. AltaMira Press.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 97 stav i posebno uverenje3 koje podrazumeva transpersonalni odnos åiji je izvor u Bogu. pogotovu u smislu opãte sekularizacije kakva je danas na delu..obuhvata celokupan æivot koji je u odgovarajuñoj vezi sa Bogom. 2007. Stanton. Za autora je vera svedoåanstvo drugog u kome se ona iznenada otvara za nas. David. Kathryn and Marlan. Lanham.. vec autoritetom ili svedoåenjem nekog drugog koji je otkriva ili se na nju poziva’’ (Buck. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. sa drugim ljudima i celom planetom. Kniter i Madæets zakljuåuju da religijska vera:’’.nalazi svoju istinitost u ultimativnoj stvarnosti. Vidi: Leeming..4 Zakljuåujemo da religijska vera: ’’ . Madden. prakse i kontinuiranog samoposmatranja koje se reflektuje na ponaãanje i stavove. William. bez posebnog zahteva za razumskim i kritiåkim delovanjem. uviœamo koliko je naã zadatak teæak. oseñanja i fenomena – od afriåkog fetiãizma. U ’’Enciklopoediji religije i druãtva’’ moæemo proåitati da je religijska vera sistem verovanja. 1851: 180). trebalo da se uhvati u koãtac sa postmodernim shvatanjem Svetog. uviœamo teãkoñu definisanja vere: ona..’’ (Nickoloff. niti razliåite kontekstualizacijske religijske forme verovanja. preko lamaistiåkog budizma. ovako izneta. Espin. bez stvarnog uåeãña misaonog. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. definicija religijske vere. Iako u mnogo åemu prevaziœena. Springer. dok bi sa druge. do islama. koja veoma specifiåno opisuje problem definisanja religijske vere: ’’Vera je ona saglasnost koju dajemo neåijem predlogu. godine. Ako tu dodamo i savremene komunikoloãke standarde i medije. New York. naroåito internet. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. Na ovom mestu preneo bih misao Åarlsa Buka iz 1851. predstavlja temelj za miãljenje mnogih da je religioznost a priori iracionalna i samo mistiåka delatnost duha.

na æalost. Daniel. kao stalno aktuelan i aktivan princip. vera podrazumeva slobodu miãljenja i izbor æivotnog stava. koji se otkrio ljudskom rodu svojom logosnom prirodom kroz Sveto pismo. Howard – Snyder. Jeff. Faith. Thomas.veñ ono ãto Bog o sebi objavljuje’’ (Lewis. plod izabranja i posebnog 6 Vidi: Jordan.. 1995: 34). dañemo i svoju definiciju religijske vere: ona je specifiåan oblik svesnosti koji podrazumeva veru u Boga. Biblija. kojom se Bog otkriva. kao Tvorca ljudi i Univerzuma. Lanham. Pateñi. obznanjuje i poziva: ’’Ne sme biti zaboravljeno da je za bibijsku veru krucijalno ne ono ãto o Bogu åovek govori. 1953: 113). Madges. Ne smemo.. od uopãtavanja. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. N° 9 pokreñe ljude da prihvate naåin æivota koji proishodi iz takvog odnosa’’ (Hill. a ne delo ljudske mudrosti. . Gospod je. Takav Bog – milosrdan i svemoguñ – jeste poåetna taåka u razumevanju religijske vere Starog i Novog zaveta. a posebno onih koje iznose Isus Hristos i Njegovi apostoli.6 Iako neiscrpna kao tema. Biblijski oblik religijske vere jeste spiritualna manifestacija Njegove Svevolje koja poseduje dve komponente: veru u Boga i veru u Njegovu Reå. apsolutni Kreator neba i zemlje i Odræavalac kreacije. u ovom trenutku. tako. zaobiñi ni problem slobodne volje koja nalazi svoje mesto u verskom. Knitter. postaje Boæija jedinstvena objava. religijska vera je neophodni i poåetni åinilac razumevanja fenomena religijskog (Svetog) u åoveku. Freedom and Rationality. druãtvu i istoriji. Bogonadahnuti tekst Biblije zapoåinje æivot u okviru civilizacije s jednom jasnom namerom – ocrtavanjem ljudskom rodu Boæijeg plana spasenja koje se ostvaruje verom: ’’U Novom zavetu vera. po sebi. 1996. 1997: 3). odnosto. Definicije biblijske vere Biblijska vera je izraz koji se koristi za definisanje Svetopisamskog uåenja. time. je predstavljena kao dar Svetog Duha. ãto podvlaåe Flinova i Tomasova: ’’ Religijska vera je jedinstven izbor verovanja u Boga i æivljenja u odnosu sa Njim’’ (Flynn.98 Teoloãki åasopis.

Opravdavajuña vera poåiva na uverenju da je Bog pravedan. Ona je uvek individualno fokusirana na Svetog Sina i Njegovo Boæansko delo na zemlji (Dl.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 99 otkrivenja koje ljudsko srce nije samo osmislilo’’ (Berkhof. Spasavajuña vera usmerena je na iskupljujuñu ærtvu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda i Spasitelja. znanja i razumevanja’’ (Hodgson. Kao ãto moæemo razumeti. odobravanje i liåno poverenje’’ (Grudem. doktrinarna vera. 1. Vrste biblijske vere Iako postoji mnogo razliåitih podela. 1. posredniåka vera. dnevna vera i 6 dar vere. 2. vera nije moguña i da znanje mora pratiti odreœeno oseñanje. podrazumeva shvatanje poruke Pisma. biblijska vera nije samo postignuñe ljudskog biña koje traga za Bogom. Ona je i poåetak biblijski usmerenog æivota. 3.. kojeg ne moæe biti bez jasnog sagledavanja Njegove volje kroz Reå i zato Hodæson naglaãava: ’’. 4. potvrda Boæije promisli i naåin soterioloãkog ostvarivanja. spasenju. 6). 2001: 19). veñ primarno Boæiji neposredovani akt u bogotragaocu koji je spreman za primanje takvog milosrdnog poklona. opravdavajuña vera. Ona je potpuno poverenje u . 15. posveñenja i ljubavi. spasavajuña vera. Pravednost Boæija se odnosi na sve izabrane vernike i ne zavisi od ljudskih æelja ili htenja (Post. Biblijska vera. 5. kako vidimo. Jasno je da bez izraæene emotivistiåke crte. Posredniåka vera podrazumeva sposobnost razumevanja Boæanskog delovanja u nama. ali da li je to dovoljno? Grudem i Parsvel odgovaraju: ’’Prava spasavajuña vera ukljuåuje znanje. mi ñemo se u tekstu ograniåiti na osnovne vrste vere koje moæemo nañi u Svetom pismu: 1.3). koje se sastoji od pouzdanja. jesu elementi doktrinarne vere bez kojih hriãñanstvo uopãte ne bi bilo moguñe (Jd..vera je vrsta miãljenja. Doktrinarna ili opãta vera se odnosi na osnovna uåenja Svetog pisma i predstavlja polaziãte svih daljih versko – teoloãkih razmatranja. Istine o Svetoj Trojici. usinovljenju. Purswell. ali i da je vernik opravdan pred Njim i Njegovom svetom voljom. 1999: 307). crkvi i sl. 1979: 1). 29).

2. kroz Reå. milost i ærtvu nije moguñe razumeti biblijski oblik vere. 10.100 Teoloãki åasopis. kao i zakljuåci koje moæemo izvesti7: 1. ãto je krucijalno. Dar vere moæemo razumeti samo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. stalna pouzdanost u Boæiju prisutnost i voœstvo. tako da mu se liånost u potpunosti predaje u poverenju i ljubavi (Gal. 5.php . 10. Bez pouzdanja u Njegovu promisao.greatbiblestudy. ãto znaåi da je to jedan od osnovnih darova koje Bog daje crkvi na proslavljenje. 11). 2. 23). dopustivãi mu da se obrati i iskupi (Rim. iz kojih proishode svi ostali elementi vere i potpunog poverenja. 7 Vidi: http://www. ka ljudskom biñu. Iako Boæija suãtina ostaje skrivena. 11. Jasno je da biblijska vera sadræi dva elementarna principa: a) veru u Njegovu volju i b) veru u Njegova obeñanja. otkrio Sebe svetu. N° 9 izbavljajuñu snagu Gospoda. ne samo za pojedince koji svedoåe o svom daru. On je. dovodi nas do Boga. Ona obuhvata svakodnevno usmerenje na razvijanje nove hristocentriåne svesti koja nam ukazuje na dnevnu Boæiju prisutnost (II Kor. mi otkrivamo sve ãto je Bog o sebi dozvolio da se spozna. Dnevna vera ukazuje na neophodnost permanentnog verovanja u Boga i Njegovu Silu. 1 – 3). Prouåavajuñi Sveto pismo. 7). Vera u Boga utvrœuje pouzdanje Vera je uvek odnos – od Boga. ali i to biñe odgovara liånom verom svom Tvorcu. Ta vera je jasna. kao izvora Pravde. Znanje o Bogu utvrœuje veru Naãa spoznaja Istine. 20).com/biblical_faith. kroz ceo æivot i u svakom trenutku (Jev. veñ i za ãirenje same crkve kroz evangelizaciju i misiologiju (Jev. kroz Logos – Sina.

koji je usklaœen sa tipom liånosti. ali i velika misterija pred svakim biñem koje teæi odgonetanju osnovnih istina æivota i smrti: ’’Prava vera je vera u jednoga Boga u Trojici. i izabrani) i . u celini moæemo nazvati ’’darovima sluæbe’’ ili joã preciznije ’’darovima sluæenja’’ svima kojima je to sluæenje potrebno. i æivot. Snajder se nadovezuje: ’’Duhovni darovi su dati ne samo za liåno uæivanje. sve moæe.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 101 3. nije samo oseñanje. ali je svuda prisutan. Flin potvrœuje: ’’Dar bih opisao kao posebnu kvalifikaciju odobrenu od strane [Svetog] Duha svakom verniku za osposobljavanje sluæenja u okviru Tela Hristovog’’ (Flynn. Bog je Biñe bez poåetka i bez kraja. po Pismu. primarno. ali i odgovornoãñu koja svaka sluæba u crkvi sa sobom nosi.’’ (Snyder. sve zna. ãto znaåi da Duhovne darove. sve vidi. naravno. episkop Amfilohije.. 13). veñ zbog opãteg dobra. Stot daje opãtu definiciju darova Duha: ’’Duhovni darovi su odreœeni kapaciteti dodeljeni po blagodati Boæijoj i kroz Njegovu snagu. iz åega sledi da svi verujuñi mogu biti nosioci darova (åime ne postaju. dok kroz odnos sa bliænjima pokazujemo pozitivan stav prema celokupnoj tvorevini. 1976: 132). a koji odgovaraju odreœenim ljudima i njihovim sluæbama’’ (Stott. 1974: 20). åak. Dar vere Ako pokuãamo da versko odgonetnemo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. Bog je pun ljubavi prema svim ljudima i svima stvorenjima’’ (Episkop Danilo. o svemu brine. ona je i poverenje. 1964: 87).. automatski. Iz svega iznetog uviœamo teãkoñu precizne analize vrsta biblijske vere. onda je upravo dar vere jedan od osnovnih aktualizacija Treñeg Lica Trojice u biñu verujuñih. 1996: 3). Ta se ljubav uvek odnosi na Boga i Isusa Hrista. vaæno. Autor koristi termin ’’kapaciteti’’ da bi naglasio pouzdanost i volumen odreœenog dara. i ljubav. veñ naåin egzistencije iz svesti novog duha i oåiãñenog srca (I Kor. Tvorca neba i zemlje i svega vidljivog i nevidljivog. ãto je. Pouzdanje u Boga utvrœuje ljubav Sveto pismo na mnogo mesta ponavlja da vera pokazuje svoj efekat samo ako je bazirana na ljubavi. ne ni za liåni duhovni razvoj. i nada. On je Duh koji se ne vidi. Ljubav.

102 Teoloãki åasopis. kako za pastoralnu. koristeñi svaki resurs radi ostvarivanja odreœenog plana. Assembly of God Publishing House. takoœe. dar vere moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu sposobnost åiji je izvor u Svetom Duhu i sluæi samoizgradnji verujuñih. Nottingham. Harold. ka prisutnim vernicima i podrazumeva se u pastoralnoj sluæbi. Instrumentalni aspekt dara vere odnosi se. Moæemo zakljuåiti da su darovi Svetog Duha kompleks razliåitih sposobnosti koji sluæe razvoju crkve i svih njenih vernika. okrenut ka unutra – ka pojedincu sa posebnom idejom i doæivljajem i neophodan je. Bez njih. joã na poåetku moramo napraviti jasnu distinkciju izmeœu hriãñanske vere. ali i baziåan dar Svetog Duha koji deluje na opãtem. Interventni aspekt podrazumeva specifiåan oblik uvida i snage da se preduprede ili suzbiju krize u crkvi. 8 Vidi: Horton. koji su jednako vaæni. rastu i utvrœivanju crkve i evangelizaciji sveta. a elementi su: Biblija. dar vere ne bi bio prepoznat ni blagosloven. Vizionarski aspekt je intristiåan. Dar vere. a koje moæemo oznaåiti kao instrumentalni. molitve. Navedeni aspekt se pojavljuje samo u situacijama kada postoji konkretna pretnja po zajednicu i on je neophodan element svih sluæbi u crkvi. propoved. 1934. b) pouzdanost i c) izvesnost. Navedeni aspekt dara Duha uvek je okrenut ka spolja – ka zajednici. Pored mnogih faktora po kojima se Dar prepoznaje. N° 9 svi mogu doprinositi razvoju crkve. Ako bismo svoju paænju okrenuli ka daru vere. po sebi. i dara vere. kao instrumentalizacije Boæije promisli8: hriãñansku ili opãtu veru moæemo razumeti kao izraz Boæije ljubavi i prisutnosti u æivotu ljudi. . vizionarski i interventni. prvenstveno. Uzimajuñi reåeno u obzir. The Gifts of the Spirit. socijalno – eklisijalnom planu. tako i za dijakonijsku sluæbu. Dar vere. slavljenje i sl. na veru kao instrument sluæenja. naveli bismo samo tri: a) usmerenost. niti bi takav dar bio platforma za razumevanje ostalih darova Svetog Duha. moæemo posmatrati i kroz tri aspekta. Vizionarski aspekt usmeren je na osobe koje imaju moguñnost da sagledaju buduñe potrebe crkve. dok je dar vere specifiåan.

Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. 28). Ali. koja za cilj ima stvaranje spiritualnih potencija za razvoj naroda Boæijeg. naãu pravednost. Chuck. Pravednost vere u ’’Confessio Belgica’’ (1561. 2008. moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu intervenciju u sistemu Boæijeg plana. i Baynard. ålanu koji nosi naslov ’’Pravednost vere’’ moæemo proåitati10: ’’Verujemo kako na sledeñi naåin spoznajemo ove velike tajne: Sveti Duh nam u srcu pali plamen istinske vere koja prihvata Isusa Hrista sa svim Njegovim zaslugama. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. u potpunosti je spasen. Dakle. neizostavno sledi – ili u Hristu ne nalazimo sve ãto nam je potrebno za spasenje ili je sve potrebno u Njemu. A Isus Hristos je naãa pravednost. Stoga. jer bi to znaåilo da je Isus Hrist samo napola Spasitelj. Kada ta 9 Za viãe informacija vidi Predgovor dr Jasmina Miliña u ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. 2008. reñi da Hristos nije dovoljan. Chuck Baynard. moæemo reñi da smo opravdani samo ’verom’ ili verom ’bez vrãenja Zakona’ (Rim. 3. te da ne traæi niãta ãto je izvan Njega. s pravom. åineñi da naãe srce postaje Njegovo. Zato.) Doktrinarni dokument ’’Belgijsko veroispovedanje’’ predstavlja najstariji i najznaåajniji izraz teoloãke misli Reformisanih crkava Evrope i sveta. veñ je ona samo sredstvo kojim prigrljujemo Hrista. a vera je sredstvo koje nas dræi u zajednici s Njim i svim Njegovim dobroåinstvima. 2008. Tordinci. jer nam prepuãta sve zasluge i sva sveta dela koja je uåinio za nas i umesto nas. ne mislimo da je samo vera ta koja nas opravdava. Prevedeno i prireœeno prema: ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’.9 U svom 22. U sluåaju poslednjeg. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. veñ da je i neãto drugo potrebno za spasenje je najveñe bogohuljenje.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 103 tako. s Pavlom. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. onaj koji ima Hrista po veri. 10 . Tordinci. poãteno govoreñi.

do potpune predanosti Bogu. N° 9 dobroåinstva postanu naãa. a vera u Njega putovanje do u izvesnost spasenja. Istaknimo joã neãto: sve tradicionalne protestantske i evanœeoske crkve prate izneti teoloãki credo. pak. ona su viãe nego dovoljna da nas razreãe naãeg greha. Vera u iskupiteljsku ærtvu na krstu dovoljna je za veåni æivot.’’ Jasno je da reformisana (kalvinistiåka) teologija svoje korene vidi iskljuåivo u Pismu koje potvrœuje nebesku ulogu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda. Posredstvom Svetog Duha.. Hristos ili jeste. Vera je pozvanost i povezanost. Hristos nas je pozvao da ga sledimo i tome ne moæemo niãta dodati.104 Teoloãki åasopis. Dakle. ’’ .. pali se æar predanosti åiji je nedvosmislen izraz vera u Mesiju kao Spasitelja ljudi. istrajnost i trpeljivost. vera je sredstvo koje nas odræava u zajednici sa Gospodom. ili nije i tu ne moæe biti sredine! Tako. Moæemo napisati tomove knjiga o biblijskoj veri. tako da slobodno moæemo govoriti o korenima razumevanja uloge i znaåaja Isusa Hrista upravo kroz dela Æana Kalvina i dokumente reformisanih/prezviterijanskih crkava. iznad svega. Zakljuåak Nezahvalno je iznositi zakljuåak na temu biblijske vere. tvrdo åekanje onog åemu se nadamo. 11. zatvorimo oåi i zakoraåimo. pravednost i ljubav. i svaka sumnja u tu istinu iskljuåuje nas iz kruga izabranih. 1). æiva realnost koju je moguñe ostvariti i koja se dostiæe u srcu i umu bogotraæitelja. ali tako ãto prihvatamo i uranjamo u Hrista. naglaãavajuñi hristocentriåno versko usmerenje. a po volji Svetog Oca. åime soterioloãki put biva osiguran. ali moæemo se i prepustiti reåima apostola Pavla: ’’Vera je. a svoje svedoåanstvo nalazi kroz dobroåinstvo. Zato. Ta izvesnost je konkretna. a moæda. ona zauzima sve mentalne kapacitete i podrazumeva ceo æivot – od svakodnevnih misli i odluka. (Jev. verom. postajemo opravdani verom. niti oduzeti – On je put. ali i tek zapoået. i dokazivanje onog ãto ne vidimo. poverenje u ljubav koju gaji Otac prema svojoj deci.

by analyzing the text from the traditional reformed (Calvinist) document ’’Belgian confession’’ author introduces the thesis that Christology of protestant-evangelical type has roots in the theology of Jean Calvin and other reformed thinkers. CITIRANA DELA: Baynard. gift of faith. Bible. author is providing possible answers on the following questions: what is religious faith and which are the elements of biblical belief concept? Considering actuality as a form of crisis of religious identity. Hendrikus. Berkhof. 2008. B.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 105 Summary In this paper. Tordinci. theology of gifts. Chuck. 2008. . Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. Chuck Baynard. which basis is connection between biblical faith and life. Key words: Religion. Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje. Christian Faith. Eerdmans Publishing Co. without which it is not possible to recognize Gods presence in and among people. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. Grand Rapids. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. the work brings us the basic premise of the Christian theological concept of Gods existence in the world through terms such as ’’general faith’’ and the ’’gift of faith’’. 1979.. Wm. Also. Christ. Holy Spirit. belief. God.

Leslie. Christian Faith. Hexham. 2009. Faith. Religion and Theology. 1996. Philadelphia. A Theological Dictionary. Purswell. Lanham. Srpska pravoslavna Eparhija sremska. 19 Gifts of the Spirit. Everett. Episkop Danilo. Grudem. Thomas. Regent College Press. Paul and Madges. 1999. Knitter. 2007. Charles. Encyclopedia Britannica. Gloria. William. Bible Doctrine. 1851. Charleston. Jeff. Charles. Hodgson. Twenty – Third Publications. Crissy & Markley. Peter. episkop Amfilohije. The psychological elements of religious faith. Flynn. Sremski Karlovci. 1974. N° 9 Buck. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Biblio Life. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. Mystic. 1997. Wheaton. Eileen. 1999. 1995. Brennan. Vanc couver. Grand Rapids. Victor Books. Wayne.106 Teoloãki åasopis. Concise Dictionary of Religion. Louisville. . Zondervan. Carroll. Flynn. Hill. 2001. Living Faith. Nema lepãe vere od hriãñanske. Irving. Westminster John Knox Press.

Baptism and Fullness. Philadelphia. John. Espin. 1998. 1888. 1976. 1964. Baker Book House. Edwin. David. Westminster Press. 1934. AltaMira Press. Grand Rapids. Snyder. Collegeville. Assembly of God Publishing House. William. Inter – Varsity Press. 1953. Lanham. James. Leeming. Harold. Liturgical Press. izdavaå nepoznat. 1954. Nickoloff. 2009. Schaff. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Madden. The Biblical Faith and Christian Freedom. Philip. Inter – Varsity Press. James. Orlando. Stanton. Downers Grove. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. The Gifts of the Spirit.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 107 Horton. 2007. . Kathryn and Marlan. Nottingham. Downers Grove. Howard. New York. Marlineau. The Problem of Wine Skins. Springer. London. An Introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies. A Study of Religion. New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge. Stott. Lewis. Swatos.

God talk when compared to the demands of modern scientific theory it seems that it is impossible. rationality. theology of God. The crisis is best described in terms of a challenge. a popular approach to religious studies today.04. The main argument is that theology is in essence God talk and specifically talk about the identity of God in contrast to religious studies where God is talked about in terms of a human projection. to a certain degree.2010 Prihvañeno: 05. In this article the author explores the differences between theology and religious studies by focusing on the theology of God. . philosophy of science. revelation. God talk. taken for granted. Under the Line It was during my studies that I first became acquainted with what is known as ‘the religious scientific critique of God and theology’. biblical theology. the identity of God. I was faced with the challenge to rethink and to reevaluate the theological assumptions that I had become accustomed to and that I had. rather by focusing on a biblical theological understanding of the identity of God.2010 Originalni nauåni rad Speaking of God Key words: theology. But we see this as no reason to abandon theology as God talk. The confrontation with this critical approach to theology eventually culminated in an intellectual and personal crisis.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet By Csongor –Szabolcs Bene 109 UDK 211:215 Primljeno: 01. theology is not only possible as God talk but also justified.04. religious studies.

These indicated that all religions have a certain ‘holy book’ that contains their teachings. In the scientific community the researcher of religion must take the position of methodical atheism. From an objective and uninvolved perspective all religious experiences seem quite similar. under the line. Above the books. above the line the word God was posited. The one engaged in the study of religions must not be biased by any of the religions under consideration.110 Teoloãki åasopis. they all have a holy book. On a fundamental level this means that the line cannot be crossed either way. by consequence unhistorical entity. the name was written of a key figure. points only in one direction. an exceptional figure and a God. This ultimately means that all that there is above the line is out of reach. God exists as an undefined. a couple of matchstick figures were drawn. and humans of all that is physical. God is posited above the all-dividing line between the physical and the metaphysical. which guarantees scientific objectivity. on a second row. The fourth assumption is that the religious experience is a one-sided affair. Above the line. from bottom up. All that there is under the line is what matters. unidentified and. Judaism. God was thus part of all that is metaphysical. a line was drawn. Buddhism and Hinduism. at the bottom of the board. The arrow. after all. The ul- . The line on the white board indicated the divide between the natural and the supernatural. The second assumption is related to the first: because religion is objectively analyzed. from the respective religion. The third assumption has to do with what is above the line: God. closest to the all-dividing line between humanity and God. in philosophical terms the physical and the metaphysical. The drawing is based on certain assumptions about the reality of the religious experience and the consequent scientific analysis of it. the scientific approach presupposes certain similarities between human religious experiences. Above these figures. since its analysis is objective. The first assumption is that this image of religions today is the most scientifically responsible. Islam. as the one who provides access to God. The matchstick figures symbolized the major religions in the world today: Christianity. books were drawn. N° 9 The argumentation in class went like this: on a white-board. which indicates the dynamics of the religious experience.

God is . taking into account the above criticism. which stands for ‘a being up there’. But ultimately this God has its home in the human consciousness and ability to project a superior higher being. In the face of this criticism I. can be identified. mute being who is decorated with superlatives. This implies the obvious conclusion: God is not an entity on its own but just another faculty of the human imagination. In post-Kantian terminology. It is a God with no history. God is a generic term. God is a projection of the human mind. i. as a theologian. and on the other well described by abstract definitions like all-powerful. The heart of the problem is that a nonspecific conception of God. has a history. God has acted at given times and in certain places to a specific group of people. in terms of divinity. all-knowing. God is defined as a distant. have been asking the following question: what about the identity of God? From a Christian theological perspective. It is no longer a talk about God as such. does not do justice to the Christian theological talk of God. I was familiar with the fact that theologians talk about God as a well-identified entity. but it is intrinsically bound to the projections of the human mind. I am challenged to consider the possibility of theology as talk about God. which is at the heart of the modern criticism of theology as a discipline. In history. It is evident that from a Christian theological perspective there are some problems with the above-mentioned critical approach. God is not just a general concept. faceless. The reason is that. but talk of the religious feelings of human beings. As a Christian theologian. The irony is that this divine being is on the one hand unidentified. no people and no places. but has a Name. What I am about to challenge in this article is the religious scientific approach to theology specifically its ‘generic conception of God’ in terms of ‘the highest divine being’. can be called upon and thus. from a religious-scientific (Religionswissenschaftlich) perspective. ever-present etc. everything beyond that line is a projection and in the final analysis non-existent.e. Since human consciousness is bound to all that is under the line.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 111 timate assumption is that the Divine is not an entity on its own. So God is well identified through the stories told by his people through the ages. This is precisely the underlying principle. theology.

God has an identity. It is a classic definition. The consequent stories. as a way of showing our specific take on the matter. What is Theology? Beyond a personal motivation lies also a certain understanding of what the discipline of theology is. fides quaerens intellectum. songs.J. consequently the identity of God. Here the identity of God has to do with a biblical theological understanding of who God is and how that understanding helps us to address the problems of a religious-scientific approach to theology in general and to the theology of God. will also become more evident. Theology then is a process of rationalization of the believer’s faith experiences. According to the anselmian formula. Proslogion: with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. . “faith seeking understanding”1 is one of the most well known definitions of theology. to a certain 1 St. We will present our definition of theology alongside these definitions.112 Teoloãki åasopis. wisdom sayings and testimonies document Gods history with these people. Charlesworth. translated with an introduction and philosophical commentary by M. speaking to them and acting in their lives. Definitions often carry within them the unspoken presuppositions which lie at the heart of one’s theological work. which is still popular and much appreciated by theologians. Anselm. laws. Anselm of Canterbury’s classic formulation. It is this theological understanding of God that does not match the modern scientific perspective of the divine. In order to understand what Christian theology is. N° 9 talked about in terms of appearing. (Oxford: Clarendon Press. By making explicit what I understand theology to be. 1965). These experiences are related to a certain tradition. meeting people. it is wise to first look at some well-known definitions by representative theologians through the various ages of Christian theology. theology is a discipline by which the believers seek to express their beliefs in a reasonable and ordered way.

3 See. Rationality. This break is significant for the way theology is understood today. as it were. . D. Theology became more of a system of thought.3 In modernity. Questions are often raised as one inquires about modern theology: is theology a discipline restricted to the life of the Church or is it a public discipline (meaning apart from the Church). experience. Theology during this early period was fully a church discipline that belonged to the community of faith. Most theological works were dealing with the problems related Christology. then what is its public relevance? If theology is a matter of public interest. with a strict demarcation be2 By Credo we mean the theological and confessional achievements of the various Councils of the Church roughly before 400 AD.. Theology was a multifaceted discipline that gave a rational synthesis of the Church’s Credos. The early church fathers focused. 680.F. This faith was hallmarked by the scandalous claim that God had become a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. the character of theology has been mostly shaped by its position within the gap between church and university. and specifically with the God-human relationship. community and talk. Wright. mainly on talking about God’s being in light of the challenges presented by the critics of the Christian faith.2 and also elucidated the content of faith with regard to beliefs that were contrary to the Credo. faith. are all important aspects in one’s definition of what the discipline of theology entails. Theology moved. a scientific discipline.” in NDT. With the emergence of scholasticism came also the uprooting of theology as a Church discipline. one could talk about a separate development in modernity. In the Middle Ages a certain shift took place in the way theology was understood. “Theology. which ought to be taught in an academic setting? If theology is strictly related to the Church. a subject taught in the academia. from the Church into the university. then what defines its content and aims and what is its relevance to the life of the Church? Thus far. and by consequence. in their theology.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 113 community and to the individual person.

2000). N° 9 tween church theology and academic theology.. with signs other than linguistic – in the church called “sacrament” and “sacrifice” – or by other behavior of our community. they also have to deal with the relevance of academic theology for the life and practice of the Church. “Theology: is the systematic reflection on the content of the relationship. The Triune God. S. Christelijk Geloof. systematic theology is the reflection on and the ordered articulation of faith. pleading it before him and praising him for it.. H. 1997). The definitions of the modern period are marked by the struggle to precisely define theology as a discipline. (Oxford: Oxford University Press.. that Jesus is risen and what that means?”6 “Theology is reflection upon God whom Christians worship and adore. while on the other hand. A. Christian Theology. 32. 7 McGrath. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.”7 Berkhof. 4 5 e Grenz. An Introduction.”4 “Basically. 2 Ed. theologians try to show the relevance of theology for public matters. between us and Him. Modern theologians often seek to bridge this gap.. in a language. 1997). vol. J. On the one hand. The church’s specific enterprise of thought is devoted to the question.114 Teoloãki åasopis. 1. (Oxford: Blackwell.”5 “…theology is the thinking internal task of speaking the gospel.. 2002). which God in Jesus Christ has established. 141. Theology for the Community of God. R. 5. Systematic Theology. nd . The following classic definitions are reminiscent of this very ambiguity. How shall we get it across.W. 8 druk (Kampen: Kok. 1.E. 6 Jenson. whether to humankind as message or to God in praise and petition – for of course the church speaks the gospel also to God.

To talk about God does 8 9 Barth. K. is critical and systematic reflection of the presupposition of the Church’s ministry of witness. The theologian’s task is to reflect on and to speak about the content of faith. The ancient Greek philosophers used this . the content of theology.word of or about God. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. in community with others.. (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. is God Himself in his dealings with the world and the ensuing good message of His works. theology is understood and defined as an intellectual discipline. Van de Beek. and. God. i. New Edition. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. in the academy or in the public square. by implication. It may be in the church. A. i. the content of faith. (Nijkerk: Callenbach.”8 “…Theology is about the knowledge of God. Theology is ultimately related to the church in an essential way.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 115 “Now the matter. This is not a mere translation of the Greek rendering of theos – logos. Theology in other words is talk about God.”9 Beyond the ambiguity of these definitions. 10 The word theology is the convergence the two Greek words ‘theos’. Third.God and ‘logos’ . but also about God himself.e. theology happens in relationship with a faith community. Second. In short. the Church.10 rather. it is the classic understanding of what the exercise of theological work entails. God kennen – met God leven. However it is not only about the human ideas about God or the human religious feelings of human beings. related in its aims and tasks to the theologian who reflects on the content of his faith.e. 1982). for it finds its roots and ends in her. 2002). But the context in which theological reflection and speaking happens may vary. theology. 2. there are some common features that unite them: first. The basic premise of our definition is that the task of theology is to talk about God. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie.. theology is broadly defined in modernity as a discipline.

theology is also talk about the world and humanity.e. The identity of God implies the actual presence of God in history. This is not only an individualistic endeavor. the most fundamental question the theologian had to answer was an epistemological question. it became related specifically to the sum of the teachings about God in the Christian tradition. but also to the broader meaning of what talk means. The above definition of theology might be considered a narrow representation of what the task of theology might entail in its totality. and can also be addressed. God is not a general term for some abstract ‘high being’. This can be traced to the all-defining question of the Enlightenment: how do you know what you know? Most modern theologians struggled to definition for all teachings about metaphysics. It is right. a discourse in verbal and nonverbal forms. . This critical note implies that theology is more than just talk about God. in Christian thinking. our question about the identity of God is a departure from the kind of theological prolegomena developed during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. N° 9 not only refer to the act of utterance itself. Theology is an articulated exteriorization of the theologian’s experiences related to God. the Church through the ages. It implies a certain way of talking about God. On a fundamental level. because in a certain sense. Later. To talk about God is to talk about the identity of God.e. To formulate this in a question: who is this God. Here we focus on this one aspect of theology. i.116 Teoloãki åasopis. but the contrary is true. To talk about God and the identity of God is to talk about the God who is identified in and through the Biblical narratives. Therefore the understanding that theology is talk about God is central and directive here. namely talk about God. but also a communal act that takes place in the context of a certain faith community. The identity of God also implies that God is identified by a Name. To talk about the identity of God is to talk about a God who is identified by specific events in time and space. about whom we as theologians talk? Initially the answer to the question might seem obvious. i. In the standard post-enlightenment theologies.

The question we want to ask here is this: is it possible.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 117 justify their theologies concerning this very question. Thus Adriaanse’s 11 He has been the professor of Philosophy of Religion. in theology. Theology in the post-enlightenment era was no longer about God as such but much more about whether or not it is possible for humans to understand anything about God. Adriaanse.11 His over-all work is an outstanding exposition concerning the problems of twentieth century theology. In a way this is a different starting point than that of the classic post-Enlightenment prolegomena marked by epistemology. to replace the epistemological question how do you know? with the question who is God? Is it fundamentally possible to ask a different question and receive a different answer? In actuality this is a turn from an epistemological towards a theological foundation and understanding of theology.J. What essentially happened was that the epistemological question became the fundamental question for theology. we have identified the work of the Dutch theologian H. . Epistemological Criticism of Theology At the tail-end of the twentieth century the general feel in the field of theology was that the talk of God was not only problematic but also impossible. Ethics and Encyclopedia of Theology at the University of Leiden. from 1979 until his retirement in 2001. Part of understanding the problem of modern theology is to define as clearly as possible what the problem actually is. To avoid the risk of entering into a meta discussion of the subject. To ask the question who is God? is to ask about the identity of God. Our critical observation considering this shift is this: the kind of question one asks influences the kind of answer one receives.

N° 9 work provides the vocabulary and the conceptual framework for our analysis of modern theology. The historical overview provides us with a broader perspective on the issues Adriaanse raises and also clearly defines his position in the field. Conjectures is the guide by which 12 For clarity’ sake. Therefore it is important to shortly trace these developments. He is frequently compared with Kant. 1963). and is seen by some as the bearer in .R. Conjectures and Refutations. See O’Hear’s assessment of Poppers importance in the field of the philosophy of science: “Large claims are made for Popper by his admirers. Popper. In it we will be able to formally analyze Adriaanse’s conception of experience. the word modern in this context is not used in the sense of contemporary or today. From a systematic perspective we will see Adriaanse’s definition of what constitutes a valid theory of knowledge in its relationship to modern scientific method. formal and systematic. The order of knowledge is subject to historical processes. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.12 The Established Order of Knowing One of Adriaanse’s main arguments is that there is a certain order by which it can be established how and what one knows. After the historical considerations we will look at some of the formal aspects of the established order of knowing. We will approach Adriaanse’s argument from three different perspectives: historical. rather we use it to refer to the theological era which spans from the beginning of the eighteenth century up to the end of the twentieth century. (London: Routledge. Karl Popper’s Conjectures and Refutations 13 is an excellent introduction to the history of the philosophy of science. 13 K. The work of Adriaanse is intrinsically connected to the developments of the philosophy of science in general. What today is accepted as valid knowledge can be traced in the history of philosophy of science.118 Teoloãki åasopis. Modern: in the sense that it deals with the core of Enlightenment ideology. knowledge and rationality.

and the shape of theology in the twentieth century. he is a believer in reason and in the power of reason to solve our problems. After that he continues with the eighteenth century Enlightenment and the impact Kant had on the philosophy of science. that is what we should do: test our theories empirically against the predications which follow from them. (London: Routledge. meaning: how do we know what we know? has gone through a series of changes. Both the content and the method of knowledge are of interest here. Popper presents the fifteenth and sixteenth century tendencies through the juxtaposition of two representative philosophers: Bacon and Descartes. As falsifying our theories is the one thing we can do effectively in science. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. Popper’s treatment of Kant offers us keen insights into the shape of the scientific theory during the eighteenth century. but also the method of acquiring knowledge.” A. In it we find a certain correlation between.1. that is. what was considered science. 3-6. and abandoning any futile at verification or justification. 14 Popper. Adriaanse often notes that changes in scientific theory have had great influence on theology. and see if they survive. 2004). O’Hear (ed. Kant’s Critique. traces the history and development of the theory of science from an epistemological perspective. the Middle Ages and the Enlightenment. .14 Throughout history. and its ensuing age of rationalism. and devise a new theory to account for the data – and it is worth underlining here that Popper sees the forming of theories as a matter of imaginative conjecture.” “Popper’s philosophy of science involves putting falsification center stage.” His main contribution has been to the philosophy of science. Modern theology is mainly characterized by the influence of Enlightenment rationality. we should abandon them. Not only what constitutes knowledge has gone through changes.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 119 we trace the main tendencies of two major periods in the philosophy of science.) Karl Popper. “Popper’s philosophy of science is marked by a deep hostility to any profession of certainty or attempt to claim justification for one’s theories. as a discipline. in Conjectures. If they do not. vol. on the whole and that theology has struggled to define itself in accorthe twentieth century of the Kanitan torch.

Conjectures and Refutations. or conjecture or hypothesis. or prejudice. or superstition. Nature is an open book. 7. Only if his mind is poisoned by prejudice can he fall into error”. Conjectures and Refutations. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is the intellectual intuition of clear and distinct ideas. which leads to doxa. By following and contrasting these two. Popper leads us to the fundamental understanding of modern theories of science. This very thought contributed to the birth of modern science. What we clearly and distinctly see to be true must indeed be true. the truthfulness of Nature.120 Teoloãki åasopis. by the most optimistic view of man’s power to discern truth and to acquire knowledge”. on the other hand. Popper follows two streams in the development of the English and the European theories of knowledge and science. . “Descartes based his optimistic epistemology on the important theory of the veritas Dei.16 Bacon further distinguishes between true and false Method. Adriaanse’s work is part of this wider framework and his critique of classic theology is embedded in this kind of rationalism. Thus the truthfulness of God must make truth mani- 15 16 Popper. Bacon’s doctrine “might be described as the doctrine of the veritas Naturae. He who reads it with a pure mind cannot misread it. The first stream of thought is classical empiricism (Bacon). True method is none other than the true reading or interpretation of Nature that leads to true knowledge. False method. if not it may be uncovered by human beings. The Reformation and Renaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth century brought about a certain “epistemological optimism.15 At the heart of this optimism is the presupposition that truth is manifest. The second stream is classical rationalism (Descartes). in which the ultimate source of knowledge is observation. is the anticipation of the mind. N° 9 dance with the ever-developing findings of science. Popper. for otherwise God would be deceiving us. in other words it may reveal itself. episteme. 5.

of our errors and of our ignorance.17. 17 18 19 20 Popper. i. Popper raises the critical question of whether they truly managed to rid themselves of their dependency on authority for their optimistic epistemologies. the part which is the source of our fallible opinions (doxa). 7. not only in Descartes but also in Bacon’s form. such as the senses or the intellect.20 At stake here is the freedom of man to think.17 Both Bacon and Descartes agree that there is no need to appeal to a higher authority. Conjectures and Refutations. However. as divine authorities. 15.e. . Conjectures and Refutations. and a super-human part. Thus we are split into a human part. which seemed to function. but it seems like the efforts of both Bacon and Descartes are an attack on prejudice and naiveté. 19 New authorities have been erected: instead of Aristotle and the Bible. Conjectures and Refutations. Conjectures and Refutations. Popper’s critical analysis shows that “Descartes’ method of systematic doubt is also fundamentally the same (as that of Bacon): it is a method of destroying all false prejudices of the mind. the part which is the source of real knowledge (episteme). and they set them up within each individual man. Popper.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 121 fest”. we ourselves. the senses and the intellect were the authorities. Popper critically concludes: “We can see more clearly why this epistemology. But in doing so they split man into two parts…. all humans have the source of knowledge in them. in Popper’s opinion. remains essentially a religious doctrine in which the source of knowledge is divine authority”. Popper elsewhere points out that this is none other than Kant’s principle of autonomy. Popper. in order to arrive at the unshakable basis of self-evident truth”. and which has an almost divine authority over us”. Most historians of philosophy agree that humanity has gone from the ‘darkness’ of the Middle Ages to the ‘light’ of the Enlightenment and Modernity. Popper. 15. anti-authoritarianism.18 It may be somewhat strong to suggest. “Bacon and Descartes set up observation and reason as new authorities.

Kant made the next step. Conjectures and Refutations. Such a state of tutelage I call ‘self-imposed’ if it is due. Where Bacon and Descartes were cautious. 175. If it is a knowl21 22 Popper. Kant’s work provided the intellectual backbone for the new era on the European continent.122 Teoloãki åasopis. The kind of rationalism that has been defining the European mind-set. as the most prolific figure of this period. Conjectures and Refutations. but to lack of courage or determination to use one’s own intelligence without the help of a leader. not to lack of intelligence. Sapere aude! Dare to use your own intelligence. Popper.”22 Kant’s definition clearly summarizes the basic program of the Enlightenment: the freedom of the individual human beings to think and to define reality for themselves. has had a major influence on contemporary theology. . The first step is the clear definition of the limits of knowledge. The contribution of this ‘rebellion’ was and still is the affirmation of the autonomous human being as the ultimate and true agent of knowledge. the last couple of centuries.21 The student of theology who wants to understand the shape of modern theology has to take into consideration the impact Kant’s thinking has had. Popper places the significance of Kant’s oeuvre alongside the American and French revolutions. Kant. This is the battle-cry of the Enlightenment. Popper outlines two basic steps in the work of Kant. Nature or God. 178. is the one who systematized the achievements of classical empiricism by declaring the independence of ‘pure reason’ in his major work. N° 9 We understand this as humanity’s struggle for independent thinking. Popper’s analysis of Kant starts with a quote from Kant on the definition of Enlightenment: “[it is] the emancipation of man from a state of self-imposed tutelage… of the incapacity to use his own intelligence without external guidance. the Critique of Pure Reason. It is thinking without being conditioned by outside authorities. a step towards the liberation of the human intellect from any outside agency. A step beyond classical empiricism and rationalism is Popper’s treatment of the Enlightenment.

but that the human being himself is the one who is the judge of the truth of an ethical demand. then the critical question is how far can that kind of knowledge or intellect reach? To answer the question one must look into Kant’s relevant ideas on time and space. Human knowledge thus cannot reach beyond what is given in the world. i. is the humanization of knowledge.e. 179. but an inductive knowledge. The limits of the human intellect are determined by time and space. Popper. Popper’s survey of Kant and the two steps are important. the human being becomes a free agent. 180.the doctrine that we cannot accept the command of an authority. however exalted. however. Conjectures and Refutations. but imposes its laws upon nature’”. It is not a deductive knowledge anymore. but only in the human intellect. Conjectures and Refutations. They can. “Kant humanized ethics. 181. projection. Beyond that. Kant’s second step. Popper observes the following.25 Within the parameters of the Kantian understanding of Ethics. as he had humanized science. there is no certain knowledge only speculation. as the ultimate basis of ethics”. In Kant’s critique of religion. Popper also notes that “in Kant’s own striking formulation of this view ‘our intellect does not draw its laws from nature. Kant turns the whole Cartesian understanding of the method of knowledge on its head. we see even more clearly the relevance of the above overview.24 In other words. because they precede Kant’s critique of religion. …The doctrine of autonomy . in Popper’s analysis. Since knowledge is not found ‘out there’. . Conjectures and Refutations. be applied to ordinary physical things and events. He asserted that “our ideas of space and time are inapplicable to the universe as a whole”23.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 123 edge freed from ‘authorities’. this means that there is no outside authority. Popper explains “Kant wrote his Critique in order to establish that the limits of sense experience are the limits of all sound reasoning about the world”. Popper. Since the Middle Age there has been a gradual move towards the in23 24 25 Popper. The theory of the free thinking human being crystallizes most evidently in Kant’s ethics.

is at the heart of modern theology. In our view.124 Teoloãki åasopis. It is formulated more often as a question: how do you know what you know? In other words the certainty of knowledge had to be established in a rational way. Conjectures and Refutations. these are the key loci that hold Adriaanse’s argument together. Experience. This self-actualization is one of the main factors which determine the context of twentieth century theology. but projects his or her own God. Adriaanse’s critique of classic theology in rooted in this rationality. it is you… who must judge whether you are permitted [by your conscience] to believe in Him. The free human being. We turn our attention now to Adriaanse’s conception of experience. The Enlightenment is the main paradigm which to a large extent defines contemporary scientific rationality. you must not condemn me for saying: every man created his God. and to worship Him”. For in whatever way the Deity should be made known to you. From the moral point of view… you even have to create your God. and even… if He should reveal Himself to you. 182. . Kant provides the systematic basis on which this epistemological rationality rests. 26 Popper. in order to worship him as your creator. N° 9 dependence of human consciousness and reason.26 The freed human being has reached his/her own maturity by becoming the subject of his or her own history. Through Popper’s review of the main tendencies in the philosophy of science we come to clearly understand the ideological context in which Adriaanse poses his critique of classic theology. knowledge and rationality. They are foundational to his critique of classic theology and his theory of religious education. Knowledge and Rationality The nineteenth and twentieth century theology is dominated by Descartes’s epistemological dictum ego cogito ergo sum. who does not accept any ‘higher’ authority anymore. Popper highlights the following words from Kant: “much as my words may startle you.

C. In the problematisation of revelation. 28 Schwöbel. the recipient (D) gains an insight (E). 4 . knowledge and rationality are discussed is the prolegomena of a theological work. for Adriaanse. From the perspective of: the author (A).J. but struggled to adapt itself to the demands of science.28 The formal structure of revelation may be approached from on the one hand from the perspective of the author and on the other from the perspective of the recipient of revelation. in the revelatory situation (B). specifically to the various theories of knowledge.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 125 We have already noted that theology did not develop in a vacuum. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. He takes one step further and explores the possibilities and the validity of knowledge. or the methodology of knowledge. Revelation as a theological locus is foundational for all systematic theologies. we will trace in Adriaanse’s work what he sees as the dominant factors on the field of experience. In what follows. From the perspective of the receiver: in the act of revelation. from the author of revelation (A). who reveals himself in situation (B) in its Gehalt (C) (content) for the recipient (D) with the effect (E). it becomes clear how Adriaanse thinks about the issues related to theological method and theological rationality.27 The usual theological locus where the issues related to experience.. is not only about the “how”. of a certain Gehalt (C) (content). II Religionphilosophisch” (RGG /VI) 464-467. Rationality. The predominant discussions in theology related to revelation are focused on the possibilities (or impossibilities) of what may 27 Adriaanse. 1988) 7.. “Offenbarung. But before we engage with Adriaanse’s problematisation of revelation. Theologically speaking we are dealing with Adriaanse’s theory of revelation. knowledge and rationality. It is the place where theologians have to come to terms with the presuppositions of their theology in relation to the demands of the scientific theory. (Kampen: Kok. we want to present a common understanding of revelation in its formal and theological definitions. H.

His creatures. makes the truth of the message certain. At stake here is the following critical question: what happens between the sender and the receiver in the act of revelation? What does the receiver ‘get’ or what does he come to know from or about the sender? Or to ask the same question differently: what is the difference. There was an obvious correlation between human intellect and divinely revealed knowledge. yes there is correlation between God and humans in the act of revelation. in the apostle’s life situation marked by the apparent failure of the mission of Jesus (B). then what is the . between reason and ‘otherworldly’ or ‘received’ knowledge? It is often assumed that the kind of knowledge that revelation provides and the nature of human reason are mutually exclusive. Secondly. the almighty Creator (A). through which he gives certainty about the truth to those who listen to this message (D). this is the main challenge: can there be any genuine correlation between humans and God? The answer to this challenging question is twofold. In a nutshell. this is how the formal structure translates: Israel’s God. the presuppositions were more optimistic about the relationship between revelation and reason. (in Christ-atoned). and through which he enables life in faith as life in the certainty of truth (E). Thus God is not the projection of the human mind but the subject of revelation. and at the same time. However. and enables its execution (E). Theologically revelation implies the disclosure of God to humans. In the Middle Age. The recipient of the revelation (D) understands his life situation (B) as brought to light by this act of revelation. when revelation is seen as an act of self disclosure of God. N° 9 or may not happen between the author and the recipient of the revelation. since the Reformation the focus has shifted mainly towards reason as the place of revelation. reveals Himself. is the content of revelation (C).126 Teoloãki åasopis. The dawn of the Enlightenment went beyond this and brought this traditional relationship of revelation and reason into a problematic relationship. manifests His character as Truthful Love (C). His will and His character. however through the raising of the Crucified One his will for communion with. In theological terms. if there is any. It is apparent from this definition that God is the author (A) of the revelatory act. Firstly.

By consequence the line blurred between God and humans. 30 Barth. K. Both theologians answered these questions in their own way. One of the most significant examples of these issues is the discussions about the theologies of Schleiermacher and Barth. So talk of the ‘beyond’ does not have the character of time and space. There was no distinct subject and object relationship. vol I. 2003).D. Barth’s conclusion was then that without revelation there is no correlation possible whatsoever between God and humans.[reprint of the 1831 ed. These theological and philosophical considerations are at the basis of Adriaanse’s rejection of the classic understanding of revelation. ‘God’ is a product of human consciousness and it is ultimately bound to it.].30 Barth in a certain sense refused to locate the act of revelation in the human.. His assumption is that there is no correlation between God and human beings. Finite humans are confined to time and space (classic Kantianism) and therefore they cannot reach beyond what is given in time and space. (Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. Schleiermacher sought to define revelation in terms of the human consciousness as “the feeling of absolute dependence”. Furthermore this means that the possibility of conceiving God as an entity on its own is impossible. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. (Berlin: De Gruyter. Barth on the other hand sought to reaffirm the otherness of God and thus distinguished the subjectivity of human consciousness from the objectivity of God. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 127 human faculty that receives this act? In other words: when God reveals himself where does revelation land in the human consciousness? These critical questions shed light on the problems of human rationality and the knowledge of God. but only the thinking and feeling of human beings. and therefore 29 Schleiermacher. As the recipient of revelation humans are unable to think of or know God. He rather focused on the true subject of revelation. F.E. God.29 thus identifying the human intellect and emotion as place where the revelation of God landed. . 1932-1938).

or even talk about what has happened and what has been experienced? The problem of rational justification is the main point of criticism Adriaanse poses to theology. The heart of the problem is not so much the initial experience of God. N° 9 one cannot rationally justify God talk. A Theory of Scientific Method Now we have arrived at the point where we can look in more detail at Adriaanse’s systematic formulation of the theory of scientific knowledge. First. but the more significant issue of the talk about God or the act of rationalization and coherent speaking about what one has experienced and what has been revealed. We will continue with the systematic formulation of Adriaanse’s theory of knowledge and scientific method. public. It is not a private matter. meaning that science in its entirety is an open matter and accessible for everyone who engages in it. We have to examine at this point the two aspects of the scientific method Adriaanse proposes. So far our study has introduced the rationale of Adriaanse’s arguments. This is precisely the core of Adriaanse’s argument for the impossibility of the rationality of classic theology.128 Teoloãki åasopis.e. according to which he proposes that all theological work and talk of God ought to be measured by. This will help us to understand Adriaanse’s objections against classic theology. Here we have to make an important remark: he often defines science as an openbare31 discipline. i. The question which Adriaanse seems to be positing is this: regardless of whether revelation is possible or not. because it ought to be present on the public square. reception of the revelation. can one still rationally justify. as widely accessible as possible. . we have to see how Adriaanse defines a scientific theory. So what is a scientific theory? Adriaanse uses the following definition to identify a scientific theory: it is a sys31 Trans.

Science is not supposed to concern itself with the totality of all there is. c) Empirical adequacy – There must be sensory experiences which can be correlated with a specific theory. . logical consistency is required in the formulation of a coherent theory. H. about a concrete part of reality that is formulated in such a way that it is possible to deduce examinable theories from it. L. as accurate as possible. scientific theories cannot be about the whole of reality. they must be a well defined part of it. touch... there is also the how of scientific theories. they have to demark the specific area which they are about to address. H. What are the right steps towards developing a scientific theory? Or what are the right conditions that make scientific theories possible? Adriaanse lists five conditions that determine how a scientific theory must work: a) Precision – It has to be clearly stated which part of reality one is attempting to describe. Finally. Leertouwer. 32 Adriaanse. one should be able to see. b) Consistency – there should not be any contradiction within the whole of the argument. Second.32 It is a rational system of thought and definitions. and preferably non-contradictory in nature. Since theories are claims about reality. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. scientific theories must be verifiable. These definitions have to refer to a concrete part of reality. d) Accuracy – The hypotheses which come from a certain theory must be confirmed by facts. Krop. Scientific theories cannot refer to reality as a whole.J. (Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. 1987) 54-56.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 129 tem of thoughts and definitions. Het verschijnsel theologie. in other words. only with a part of it. rather.A. taste. and particularly not contradictory statements. measure and so on. This point strongly connects to point ‘c’..

54-56. 33 In other definitions of scientific theories. Adriaanse. the task of the historian is to recover with as much accuracy as possible what has happened. Therefore Adriaanse is not concerned with this aspect of the scientific theory. in the field of humanities and in studies such as history. This search is in actuality about the possibility of theology in an age of science. Adriaanse asks: Is theology possible in the present context of the scientific demands in a university? And if so. having established what science and adequate scientific theories are. Or in theological terms: God cannot be 33 Adriaanse. what are those possibilities? The Impossibility of Theology Earlier we have presented our definition of theology. which Adriaanse omits from his own system and that is repeatability.130 Teoloãki åasopis. The reason is that. one assumes that he or she may know the past). . one might come across one more point. A scientific phenomenon ought to be repeatable at all times with the same exact results. Repeatability is much more relevant for the natural sciences. according to classic theology God makes Himself known. We have argued that in its strictest sense theology is talk about God and specifically talk about the identity of God. repeatability is not possible. These methodological considerations bring us to our next point. Het verschijnsel theologie. be said about God? In other words: what can be scientifically asserted about God? His answer is that there is nothing to be said about God in a scientific way. However. in the sense which is universally valid. When events happen only once. To formulate this in a question. N° 9 e) General acceptance of presuppositions – every scientific theory works with a certain accepted presupposition (as in historical studies. By examining Adriaanse’s criticism of theology we submit our definition to be tested. goes further in search of a so called scientific theology. Adriaanse criticizes precisely this understanding by posing the critical question: what can publicly.

t. 36 Het Het specifiek specifiek theologische theologische aan aan een een Berkhof. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. 1981). The main question here is: how does classical theology measure up to the demands of modern scientific theories? The answer is: 34 Adriaanse. Here Berkhof talks in more detail about. F. Classic Theology and the Demands of the Modern Scientific Method Adriaanse analyses theology by measuring its scientific merit.g. en uitgeg. (Nijkerk: Callenbach. These are two critical reasons why Adriaanse considers classic theology as being not scientific.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 131 known unless He revels Himself. 9. We already have seen the five conditions necessary to establish a theory as scientific.35 Another critical point Adriaanse makes is that because classic theology is talk about God. H. God is the object of theology. rijksuniversiteit. dr.36 This very objectification of God is impossible. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . E. rijksuniversiteit. van Gennep en W. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. E. how God is the object (voorwerp) of the study of theology.v. 35 Adriaanse.15. The next step is to put classic theology against these conditions.O. according to Adriaanse. H.. is not in any way public and therefore the irreconcilable difference remains between the practice of public science and the talk of God. Verdonk. We want to understand the arguments Adriaanse presents and the way he applies the above definition and conditions of scientific theory to classic theology. .34 Revelation. Flesseman-van Leer. red.

. is able to measure up to the standards of modern science. which is needed. 57-63.e. Theology cannot pretend to deal with reality as a whole. however. then why is there evil? Good vs. 5) General acceptance of presuppositions – the presupposition which all classical theologies share is that there is a God. if God created the world good. 38 Adriaanse. Het verschijnsel theologie. it ought to focus on a specific point of reality. 2) Consistency – essentially consistency is possible in classical theological theories. The critical question is often asked here of how can one talk about something one has not seen? 4) Accuracy – based on the above empirical in-adequacy. namely consistency.g. evil is hard to explain consistently). 3) Empirical adequacy – is clearly impossible for the statements about God. the condition for accuracy is also impossible. or presupposition of atheism. This is the reason why theology has to be classified as a pseudo-science. N° 9 1) Precision – because classical theology deals with the totality of reality (i. Therefore Adriaanse’s argument establishes the following: classic theology does not correspond to the demands of a scientific theory therefore is not considered to be a scientific discipline.132 Teoloãki åasopis. God and the world as creation37) it does not correspond to the condition of scientific precision. They are theoretical in character thus miss empirical adequacy. in reality it is much harder.38 The conclusion of the above considerations is that theology only on one point. Where does this leave classic theology? What 37 Science deals with all that is in the world and not with the world itself. in today’s understanding of science all theories are developed from the vantage point. However. considering issues related to theodicy (e.

God. theologians are faced with the same kind of challenges. And third. probably the most important point for our work: talk of God in a university setting is deemed impossible. because by its method and content it only provides pseudo-knowledge. This constant growth. one can trace the development of theology through the ages and come to the conclusion that it is a living discipline. This is ultimately what it means the loss talk of God in theology. We think here of the early church fathers who did theology in the context of various competing philosophies and theologies. From the vantage point of the scientific method and philosophy of science theology as a discipline faces one the most critical challenges of our time. rather. it has to fall under general religious studies. if there is nothing to be said about God as such? Adriaanse is not about to discard theology. It has always sought to define itself on its own and in the context in which it was practiced. which in turn has an effect on its methodology and content. adaptation. Here we understand the word ‘God’ to mean an entity in itself who can be experienced in his revelation in time and space. The partial conclusion is this: classical theology when measured by the standards of science is no science. Adriaanse through his critique addresses this very challenge. The Complete Loss of the “Talk of God” The implication of the above argumentation is that scientifically there is nothing to be said about God. We also have in mind the reformers who in the context of the church developed and reformed theology. Historically. It is a challenge that goes right to the heart of what theology is. Theology thus. it loses its position as one of the sciences in the universities.’ Here ‘God’ means a conceptual entity of the human . is in a situation of crisis. in order to be able to maintain any standing. presented by the scientific developments. redefinition and affirmation of theology we call a living discipline.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 133 are the consequences? First. This is what it comes down to eventually: the complete loss of the talk of God. In modern times. he qualifies its object. The question is: what is the way forward. He suggests that the theologian cannot talk about God. Second. but only about ‘God. as understood in the classical sense.

’ Therefore. which means that there is a separation between public universities and church theology. 63. all that remains is talk of human religiosity. to the subject. the ultimate object of theology is not God but the human beings who talk about ‘God. It is a shift from theology to anthropology.’ Thus. Religious studies and science is a fairly recent development in the field of sociology and cultural anthropology. has had a political and administrative influence on the organization of the public universities and their faculties in the Netherlands. the public universities function as duplex ordo. After Schleiermacher and Feuerbach religion is understood to be the deepest longing of human beings. during this century. Christianity. In the public faculties religious science is increasingly taught of as part of the greater humanities. This is a significant move. religious science has found its home in cultural studies. Het verschijnsel theologie. practical and pastoral theory under psychology and-so-forth. The general tension between religious science and theology remains. Religious philosophy is 39 Adriaanse. meaning the human attitude towards ‘God.’39 When ‘talk of God’ is lost. N° 9 mind. where religion is researched as a cultural phenomenon. Religious philosophy. The theologian has to talk about ‘God’ only in terms of what human beings think about ‘God. also finds its roots in this age.134 Teoloãki åasopis. Here classic subjects such as exegesis come under the department of arts. As one might expect classic theology is only taught in faculties which are affiliated with a specific church and denomination. scientifically. closely related to religious science. one religion among other religions. Since the Enlightenment. church history under the general department of history. This kind of organization has led to the decentralization of theology and to the compartmentalization of the various theological disciplines. Therefore the object of research is the religious human subject. . This turn. This often causes uneasiness for theologians trying to find their way in this new constellation of sciences. Since 1876. has moved from its dominant and privileged position into being considered. one can only ask about religion.

this move is a move from metaphysics to religious and cultural anthropology. as is the case with dogmatics.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 135 not about showing the truth of one religion against the other. i. seen or talked about as an entity of its own reality.e. Adriaanse. In philosophical terms. The focus. Adriaanse. Het verschijnsel theologie. Religion understood as an expression of a whole range of human projections on ‘God’. The quotation marks have a very specific purpose in defining the division. is no longer on the Theos but on the human being. Theology in this sense is about religion.73. a divinity. Conclusion The working thesis of our study is that theology fundamentally is talk about God and more specifically talk about the identity of 40 41 42 Adriaanse. . This might seem speculative in nature but it is a real differentiation. rather. Adriaanse further develops the following differentiation to show the essential divergence between religious science and theology: Theology must be about ‘God’.42 This demarcation has to be maintained as strictly as possible. is impossible. God. By consequence it is religious anthropology. This in turn begs the question: How does one talk about God in a publicly responsible way? The short answer to this question according to Adriaanse is religious science. Only a human definition of ‘God’ is valid matter to study for the theologian or the scientist of religion. Only the human word about ‘God’ is the object of research and science. 63. 89-96. in theology. Het verschijnsel theologie.41 Adriaanse then concludes that the scientific character of religious science can be maintained as long as there is a clear demarcation from classic theology. it presents and explains religion as a universal human possibility.40 We previously have seen what the loss of the ‘talk of God’ entails as meant by Adriaanse. Het verschijnsel theologie. meaning a ‘God’ as talked about by people.

The reason is that God. we can say that we understand that there might be difficulties considering the scientific developments of the last century. One can only talk about ‘God’ as a concept. is impossible. Then it considers this God inaccessible and impossible to talk about Him. which is other than the paradigm of God talk in Israel and the Church.136 Teoloãki åasopis. We have submitted our thesis to the test in light of the religious scientific critique of theology. is a non-academic discipline. The identity of God substantiates what we understand by the word ‘God’. as such. which is intrinsically related to human religious consciousness and the human ability to project a higher being. Modern scientific theory works with a definition of God as a metaphysical transcendent being. we point toward a dynamic understanding of the word ‘God’. It was meant to compare theology to the scientific demands for an academic discipline. theology defined as talk about God. He argues that. Exactly those developments are problematic when it comes to theology and specifically to God talk. is a metaphysical matter and thus not open for public inquiry. By using the term ‘identity’. Our main argument against Adriaanse is that we do not talk about God as the one who is above the line unrelated to His presence. N° 9 God. considering the scientific developments of the last two centuries. but we talk about God who is present in His acting in the history of His people. Therefore Adriaanse calls for the abandonment of theology and proposes ‘religious studies’ as a more ‘scientific’ alternative. Adriaanse’s work was the guideline for discussing the matters related to the test. what we were dealing with is the understanding of the word ‘God’. We formulated Adriaanse’s challenge in the following question: does theology deserve the adjective ‘academic’? Is there a kind of God talk that is justified or at least plausible for such an academic discourse? Considering the main narrative texts of our theological tradition (the basic texts in the Bible) and the long and rich history of God talk. there is no reason why theology ought not to be an academic discipline. Adriaanse in his criticism of classic theology focuses on the wrong God. To answer Adriaanse’s challenge.J. H. which is . Essentially. Adriaanse has a concept of God. His conclusion is: theology considered from a scientific perspective.

which means that He is free to be and act according to His own will. theologically speaking. for Adriaanse. namely to show that the identity of God is decisive for their respective theologies. YHWH does not conform to the ideals of His people. The way we understand the word ‘God’ is the way biblical narratives identify God. God has an identity and is not merely a definition.e. The biblical narratives identify God as a person who gives His Name and where His Name is called upon. in their history. and relates to them so much that there is talk of a marriage between God and His people. It is not a constructed understanding of the word. qualifies the meaning of the word ‘God’. Adriaanse’s criticism of theology pertains exactly to this ‘God’. This is precisely the problem.e. there He is as well. He understands classic theology as being about a constructed ‘God’. It is by grace that He enters . We understand that theology pertains to this God. Theologians through the ages have struggled with this very issue. The word ‘God’. He is not to be manipulated nor used for their purposes.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 137 fundamentally defined by the Name of God. i. God talk. YHWH. talks to them. He does not simply exist: He acts. Through those narratives God exists as a separate entity who talks. He appears to people. judging people and restoring them. the biblical narratives about YHWH. but the God who is identified in the history of His people. therefore He does not fit any philosophical system or rationality that tries to domesticate Him according to its own rules. The Name. is a reminder of this very truth. He does so not outside the perceived reality but in the reality of their lives. His people’s history is His history as well. where God is defined as a high being which exists outside the reality we experience as human beings. They have to live with the knowledge that their God is God. He does things like saving people. That is the reason why he opts for understanding the word ‘God’ as a human projection. address. When we talk about God we talk about YHWH. The way we talk about God is neither the theoretical ‘God’ of philosophy nor a God who is only proclaimed in the Word. ultimately emanates from the religious imagination of humans. Time and time again we hear the motto: YHWH is God and not the idols. one of the most basic and important confession of Israel. acts and moves. The Shema. i.

N° 9 into the vulnerable covenantal bond with them. Therefore we see no reason why theologians should abandon theology as God talk. attaches His identity to them. as not being God talk. The texts give voice to those human experiences. To follow Adriaanse and denounce theology. is YHWH’s history in their interrelated identities. Biblical theology shows the way of talking about God and His identity and also that to whom God speaks become the carriers of His presence in this world. The nature of the texts and their content puts us into a position where we can affirm that theology is indeed talk about God in a specific way about His identity. . YWHW. Even though they are two different people. as the cumulative experiences of those whose lives have been addressed. We have made it plausible that in biblical theology there is no indication why theology should be seen anything less than talk about God as He indentified Himself in the history of His people. but we who have heard also talk about God. touched and defined by this God. which tell of God and who He is. Just like a married couple. humanity and the world.138 Teoloãki åasopis. So there is a concrete place where not only God speaks. The history of Israel. the participants become one and share the same history. This is the reason why knowing God is not a matter of epistemology but of history. by participating in the lives of His people. by being in relationship they are one. would be to ignore these texts and what they say about God.

zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . Nijkerk: Callenbach. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie.. A. 1981. vol I.. Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. H. Het verschijnsel theologie. New Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. H. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof.g. en uitgeg.. Beek van de. H.O. God kennen – met God leven. Verdonk. Charlesworth... Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. 1988. E. trans.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 139 Bibliography Adriaanse. K. 1987.J. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz.. t. Barth. Nijkerk: Callenbach. 1932-1938 Edition. red.J. Flesseman-van Leer. F. Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. Leertouwer.J. H. Berkhof. van Gennep en W. E. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. M. H.. Barth. L. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik.A. Krop. Proslogion: 1965. 2002. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. Kampen: Kok. Anselm. 1982. dr. K. with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo.v. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. Adriaanse.. .

(ed. Popper. Theology for the Community of God. 2004. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. Schwöbel. “Offenbarung. Christian Theology. 2000. II Religionphilosophisch” RGG4 /VI .. Schleiermacher.. Grenz.. Jenson..E.1.E.140 Teoloãki åasopis. 1997. Berlin: De Gruyter. vol. 8e druk. F. 2002.W. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.. An Introduction. N° 9 Berkhof. [reprint of the 1831 ed. C. 1997.R. London: Routledge. S. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. K. The Triune God. 2nd Ed.) Karl Popper. McGrath. J. H. 1963. Kampen: Kok. 2003. A. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]. Conjectures and Refutations... Systematic Theology.D. Christelijk Geloof. Oxford: Blackwell. vol. 1... London: Routledge. O’Hear. R. A.

Bosnia and Hercegovina. Ethnicity.991(497. Key words: Religion. One. Identity. . Peace-building.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 141 UDK 284. Mostar. In a post-war city like Mostar in Bosnia and Hercegovina religious identity is one of the main markers of division between different groups. Evangelical Church. However. This church plays an interesting role in a society that is characterised by clearly divided groups.6Mostar) Praying on the Front-Line Religion. Evangelical believers do not fit in any of the main people groups because the main criterion for belonging to a group is religious background. Reconciliation. Identity and Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar Abstract: Religion is seen by many as one of the main causes of the conflict between people in the Balkans. However. there are religious groups that can contribute to the peace-building efforts. The Evangelical church is therefore a neutral place where people with different ethnic identities can meet each other. Religious Anthropology. reconciliation in itself is not an intentional objective of the church. therefore would not expect religion to play a positive role in the process of reconciliation between Islamic Bosnian Muslims and Catholic Bosnian Croats. This article discusses reconciliation in the Evangelical church in Mostar. Conflict. This can serve as a first step in the process of reconciling conflicting groups.

when I specifically intend to say something about the Bosnian. or the Herzegovinian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. A lot of attention has been given to the way religion was used as justification of violence in the war at the end of the 20<^th century in former Yugoslavia. I do not want to deny the contribution of religion to the conflict. People from Herzegovina. The statue showed Lee in a typical fighting pose. Madrid and London almost ten years ago have shocked the world. The terrorist attacks on New York. . At first sight this subject may seem contradictory in itself. The argument for choosing Bruce Lee is that he is worshipped by Muslims. This peculiar choice shows how hard it is to find a suitable symbol for unity in the complex situation of this country. but my primary focus in this article is on the contribution of religion and religious groups to the reconciliation process. I will make it explicit. The main subject of this article is the role of reconciliation between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. It may seem strange to look for reconciliation in a religious group. N° 9 Introduction Ten years after the violent ethnic conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina1 came to an end. The constant threat of attacks in all major cities in Europe has its impact 1 In the English literature the term Bosnia is normally used for the country as a whole. see themselves as Herzegovinians rather than Bosnians.142 Teoloãki åasopis. Religion and religious groups in the Balkans are usually associated with conflict rather than with reconciliation. I will mainly use the abbreviation BiH throughout this article. The first reason is related to the current global political situation. Instead of using the full name of the state: Bosnia and Herzegovina. 2006). However. This subject is relevant to many people for several reasons. Strangely enough the symbol for unity is a statue of kung fu legend Bruce Lee. Serbs and Croats alike (Zaitchik. a monument for unity had been erected in Mostar. where I did my research. The tension between Islamic cultures and the western world is still in the news on a daily basis.

for centuries. The specific context of the Evangelical Church in Mostar naturally makes it hard to generalise any conclusions. been a symbol of religious and cultural tolerance. the debate about the Bosnian conflict between Muslims and Christians speaks into the debates about this same conflict in other parts of the world. For centuries the Balkans have been the bridge between Christian and Islamic culture. In the church where I did my research. With this article I hope to contribute to this discussion. I think it is impossible to draw . this subject is also relevant to those working for grass roots organisations doing peace building. Terrorist attacks throughout the world raise questions about religious and cultural tolerance and the way ethno-religious groups can live alongside each other. Cities like Sarajevo and Mostar have a long history of dealing with different religions and cultures within its boundaries. Apart from the topicality of religion and reconciliation on a global scale. When I write about the Evangelical Church I mean the group of people that comes to activities organised by the church on a regular basis . This act of destruction changed what had. In 1993 the old Ottoman bridge of Mostar was destroyed before the eyes of the world. no defined membership exists. It is not my objective to define who is a true evangelical and who is not. The central question in this article is ‘What is the role of the reconciliation process between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar?’ My focus is on reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. though I am fully aware that this study is a mere starting point. The rebuilding of the bridge has accordingly become a symbol of reconciliation. either in the Balkans or anywhere else in the world. into a symbol of cultural and religious conflict. Although the context in BiH is different from most other places in the world. It is hard to define the boundaries of an Evangelical Church. I have chosen to do my research in a small church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 143 on the debate about pluralistic and multi-ethnic societies. Reconciliation is one of the main objectives of many humanitarian organisations There is a lot of discussion about the possible strategies that can be used to achieve reconciliation.

Churches differ from place to place and the church in Mostar differs in many ways from a church in Amsterdam or even in Sarajevo. N° 9 conclusions about the role of reconciliation in churches in general. This does not mean that my findings are of no value for any other context. • How do people in Mostar in general construct their identity? • How do evangelical Christians in Mostar construct their identity? • What role does ethnicity play in the church? • What kind of relationships do evangelical Christians from different ethnic backgrounds have in Mostar? • In what way does the Evangelical Church actively support reconciliation? . Reconciliation can have a comparable role in various contexts.144 Teoloãki åasopis. five sub-questions need to be looked at. Nevertheless. The role of reconciliation in a church is very dependent on the specific circumstances. the answers to my questions are based on the specific situation of the conducted research. In order to be able to draw any conclusions on a reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

145

Conceptual Framework
Some of the concepts that have been used in this article could be confusing and their boundaries need to be defined. A first concept that needs clarification is religion. The role of religion in the Balkan conflicts is often debated. For a good understanding of the role of religion and religious groups in the processes of both conflict and reconciliation, it is necessary to explain how I define religion in this context. There are many definitions of religion in use, but the discussion on the definition has two extremes2. On one of the spectrum scholars define religion by the function it has in society. From this functionalistic perspective religion is for example everything that is used to give man a higher purpose in life. The difficulty with definitions like this is that the existence of religion is explained by its function. Religion is in this way reduced to a human functional construct. On the other end of the spectrum are the scientists that use a substantial definition of religion. A famous example is Tylor’s definition. He states that ‘religion is the belief in spiritual beings’ (Lambek, 2002: 21). This definition comes close to the popular use of the word religion in common parlance. In this perspective there is hardly any attention for the function religion fulfils in society. The focus is on the substantial characteristics of religion. In theology this last approach to religion is more common. In the social sciences there is more attention on the functional aspects of religion. It is not surprising that most anthropologists use a more functional definition of religion, because anthropology has human behaviour in society as its object of study. In the analysis of processes of conflict and reconciliation in a religious group it makes sense to use a functional definition of religion. But I want to avoid giving the impression that I see religion as a human construct. In this article I give an anthropological perspective
2 I divide the definitions of religion in substantial and functional definitions following Berger (Berger 1967: 194). In the first appendix to The Sacred Canopy, Berger discusses the sociological definitions of religion.

146

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

and therefore my focus is unavoidably on the functional aspects of religion. Religion is part of the total framework of systems of meaning making that people use to define their position in reality. Religion can therefore be seen as a part of culture. Religion is that part of culture that is connected to the belief in a supernatural reality. A human being is capable of constructing religion and reshaping religion. On the other hand religion has impact on the way people think and act. It is therefore of crucial importance in the way people deal with issues of conflict and reconciliation. The second concept that needs some clarification is identity. Just like religion, the word identity is often used without a clarified meaning. Identity seems to be a fashionable topic and only a few decennia ago the concept was hardly ever used in the social sciences. Identity is becoming more important, because boundaries are becoming less clear. People have to find out who they are and to which group they belong. Identity says on the one hand something about the essence of a group or a person. On the other hand the concept has to do with the outside boundaries that separate one entity from another. Identity plays a role when clear boundaries are sought. When a group wants to distinguish itself from a different group, it will stress its identity. In this case identity has to do with difference. In other cases identity plays a binding role. The concept is then used to stress things that members of a group have in common. In this case identity has to do with similarity. These two aspects, difference and similarity, are central to identity. This shows why it is such a multifaceted concept. I define identity as the common aspects of a group that distinguish one group from others. It should be noted that every person has multiple identities and these change over time (Lifton 1995: 1-20). The boundaries of group identities run through groups that have a shared identity. Let me illustrate this with an example from Mostar. A Christian teenager who lives in West Mostar and comes from a Muslim background has multiple conflicting identities. He is young, ethnic Muslim, religiously Christian, West Mostarian, Herzegovinian etcetera. In different situations this person will stress different identities. In one situations he might focus on the characteristics he shares with certain

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

147

people and in different situations he might stress those things that distinguish him from these same people. In the complex situation where religion, nationality and ethnicity are all intertwined, identity plays a crucial role. When we look at conflict and reconciliation we have to take notion of the complex system of identities and the ways these are constructed. It has much impact on the way groups and individuals interact. In everyday use, identity is often regarded as something static. People have one identity and it never changes. It is important to realise that people think about identity in this way. The ideas that people have about identity have impact on the way they behave and these ideas form a part of the social reality that I study (Baumann, 1999: 81-96). There is no point in neglecting the existence of these ideas even though I think these ideas are based on a misunderstanding of identity. In the analysis of social developments in BiH it is impossible to neglect the concept of ethnicity. Ethnicity is a form of identity. It is the identity of a group that sees itself as being culturally distinctive from other groups. Eriksen points to the fact that for ethnicity to come about, groups must at least have some form of social contact (Eriksen, 2002: 12). Ethnicity is a relational concept and not the property of a group. A strong tendency exists throughout BiH to essentialise ethnicity and therefore people’s ethnic identities. According to most people a person is Croat, Serb or Muslim. Birth determines to which of these groups one belongs. Every group claims to have a separate origin and history. This essentialist understanding of ethnicity is for a great deal based on myths of clearly distinguishable people groups (Baumann, 1999: 65, 66). Dubious interpretations of history often form the basis for these ideas. An example of this is the conviction that exists throughout BiH about the history of the Bosnian Church during the Middle Ages. Many times during my fieldwork, people tried to convince me of the fact that their ancestors had been Bogomils. To them this was proof of the Bosnians not being Catholics like the Croats. The actual historical evidence for this assumption is minimal. Nevertheless, many Bosnian Muslims still believe this. For them it is part of the justification of an independent Bosnian state. This exemplifies how people interpret history to draw

148

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sharp boundaries between ethnic groups. These boundaries are quite problematic in BiH, because it is hard to distinguish Croats, Serbs and Muslims from each other. They all generally have the same appearance and until the war they spoke the same Serbo-Croatian language. The only clear difference is their religious conviction. and this difference is therefore strongly articulated. Religion is not only used to distinguish one from the other, it also serves as a moral justification for hatred towards the other group. Although I believe that this essentialist idea of ethnicity is based on questionable argumentations, I do believe it strongly influences developments in BiH and still continues to do so. It is interesting to see that ethnic groups in BiH point to their long separate histories, while at the same time differences are being created in the present. The separate languages, for example, are a recent phenomenon. As I have said earlier, people are being transformed by the systems of meaning making that they construct themselves.

Research Methods3
In order to find answers to the question under consideration I undertook anthropological research. The research methods I chose are typically for cultural anthropology. Most of my findings stem from the material I collected in fieldwork I did in the first half of 2005 in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. To find answers to the formulated questions I conducted qualitative research. This seemed the most suitable method to find answers to my questions. Relationships between people in a church can hardly be studied through surveys or other quantitative methods. Furthermore, many of my questions regard personal experiences. Building a relationship of trust is of crucial importance to achieve insight in people’s convictions. From February till June 2005 I stayed in Mostar and became part of the local Evangelical Church. Subsequently participant observation became my main
3 The research was part of my studies at the Social and Cultural Anthropology department of the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam.

Although the people in the church knew I was doing research. The data obtained from interviews may perhaps be clear but less reliable. 5 Drinking coffee and walking around in town are the main pastimes among the Mostarians. bible studies and worship meetings. Most of them were aid workers and missionaries. . As I said. This has to do with the demographic composition of the church. For me as a young man it was easiest to get in contact with young people and mostly with men. All names of informants in this article are fictitious. 4 Usually. I visited many official church-activities like Sunday services. creating confidential relationships is crucial for qualitative research.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 149 research method. It was harder for me to get in contact with older women in church. I have tried to integrate into the church as much as possible. Next to participant observation I also used interviews as a research method. like I said before. people regarded me as just another foreigner in church4. Therefore I spent a lot of time with people in smaller groups and one-on-one. Most of them had never heard of anthropology and had no clue what my research was about. It was important to get to know people from the church also on a personal level. In the four months I spent in Mostar I successfully integrated in the church and created some good relationships. relatively many foreigners came to church. I have interviewed mostly young people and church leaders. it was harder for me to get in contact with them. youth meetings. The big drawback of this is that the interview setting is somewhat unnatural. The older people in church are mostly women and. but also many informal activities like birthdays and barbecues. This was a good way to speak with people about various matters. One advantage of interviewing over mere observation is that it produces very clear data. drinking coffee or just walking on the street5.

A policeman will not fine one of his friends. further strengthen essentialist ideas.150 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 Identity The war has turned Mostar into a divided city. Religion. Notions of belonging are of crucial significance to people in general and especially in Mostar. In BiH this is more the case than in many Western countries. In the complex situation of Mostar essentialist ideas about ethnicity and religion are both present and problematic. or the categorisation of people into strictly defined groups. Religion is being essentialised in similar ways. In this section I will discuss ethnic and religious identity. These groups have formed strong and opposing identities. Together people form a network in which personal interests are looked after. Being part of a network offers people practical opportunities. I am aware of the danger of an essentialist approach. Identity politics. belonging to a network also provides a feeling of security. 1999: 67). It is often via friends or family that people acquire a job or legal permission to start a business or build a house. The war has not only geographically divided Mostar in two. Religions are often being divided along strict lines. People feel safe in the street when they . It also widened the gap between groups. In his book ‘The Multicultural Riddle’ Baumann clearly shows how essentialist ideas have developed and what the results are: ‘Ethnicity and ethno-politics rely on rhetorics that trace cultural differences to biological differences. In BiH and in Mostar many people have an essentialist approach towards ethnicity. An essentialist approach of ethnicity and religion freezes the conflict between groups and it closes the gates for reconciliation. Many Mostarians aspire to belong to clearly restricted groups. and identity construction. ethnicity and nationality are markers used to define one’s identity. One is labelled a Muslim or a Christian. It is assumed that all Muslims are alike and that it has always been like that. This is not only the case among politicians but also among ordinary people. One person helps building the house of his brother in exchange for another service. Apart from practical advantages. they aim at purifying and canonizing the cultural essences that they have reified…’ (Baumann.

The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for strongly attached groups. Belonging to a group offers human security in precarious situations. as Baumann calls them. When I asked a person about his ethnicity. Bringa states that her book ‘contains ethnographic data which are now history’ (Bringa. Furthermore people feel supported in their convictions by others. but still many people do. I clearly want to acknowledge that both religion and ethnicity are mainly human constructs. Religion is for most people in Mostar the factor that determines to which group they belong. or Croatian identity. 1999: 64). If a person for example believes in life after death. on several occasions a people would answer: “I am a Christian”. refugees and displaced persons often have no clear idea about to which group they belong. but at the same time a person’s religion is determined by a one’s ethnicity. Nevertheless I will try to give a general picture of ethnic and religious identity in the way I encountered it in Mostar. With all these exceptions it seems impossible to have an essentialist approach to religion or ethnicity in Mostar. Children from mixed marriages. Muslim and Evangelical identity. The amount of people that form an exception in some way or another. Otherwise anthropological fieldwork would . There is much variety within these categories and moreover they are constantly being transformed. In her book ‘Being Muslims the Bosnian way’. The way Muslims perceived their religion before the war has totally been transformed by the war. is large in Mostar.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 151 know that they are part of the same group as others. At the same time this is not easy in Mostar. This way of discussing identity assumes an essentialist understanding of both ethnicity and religion. I will separately discuss Croatian. 1999: 85) Also Evangelical Christians do not really fit in one of the main categories in Mostar. Religion defines a person’s ethnic group. or ‘eccentrics’. Seeing ethnicity and religion as human constructs that show much diversity and change over time does not make them less real (Baumann. 1995: 198). Croatian culture. (Baumann. this hope is reinforced by the affirmation of people around them. Nationality and ethnicity are not very clear categories and many people are confused about the boundaries of categories. It is impossible to give a definition of a Croat.

The city has a long history of ethnic tolerance. Nearly all Serbs had fled the city. Just like BiH reflects the complex mixture of peoples of the former Yugoslavia. The people in the church were part of larger ethnic groups. the surrounding region lacks much diversity. West of Mostar lives a vast Croat majority. It is important to realise that although Mostar had a very diverse population. My research population consisted of the evangelical community in Mostar.152 Teoloãki åasopis. Serbs. Neither can one walk through Mostar without hearing the loud sound of the prayer call from the minarets’ speakers that are turned towards the west side of town. One cannot walk through Mostar without seeing this cross. After that I will discuss separately Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat identity. and identity of evangelicals in Mostar. For example. The war has changed the face of Mostar beyond recognition. Croats and Muslims managed to live in peaceful coexistence for a long period of time. a person can at the same time be Mostarian. so Mostar can be seen as a small scale BiH. Minarets and the colossal church tower of one of the catholic cathedrals define the skyline of Mostar. Constructing Identity in Mostar: Communal Factors A number of factors have significant influence on the way identity is being constructed in Mostar as a whole. N° 9 not make any sense. In this section I will first discuss factors in identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The erected religious buildings form a conspicuous mark of the division. the east . Everyone who visits Mostar for the first time is immediately confronted with the wounds of the war. West and East Mostar had been ethnically cleansed: The west side was almost totally Croatian. On the Hum Mountain south-west of Mostar. Different groups overlap here and people have multiple identities. Many destroyed buildings around the old front line form a visible scar. The region east of Mostar is a Serb dominated area. an enormous cross was erected in 2000. Bosnian Muslim and evangelical.

Some important steps towards unification were taken in the first few years after the war. The city was turned into a depressive scene. In practice the west and the east have separate police forces. One of them was the introduction of common license plates for cars so people could travel through the city freely. Not much was left of the old Ottoman centre of town. At the same time a multi-ethnic police force was established. 2002: 112). All bridges across the Neretva. It breathed death and destruction. Another important development in the reintegration process was the introduction in 1998 of one currency: the convertible mark (Bose. People from surrounding villages had taken their places (Bose. After the elections a local city council was formed with representatives from all ethnic groups. The character of the city had changed tremendously. Many young and educated people with opportunities had left Mostar and the country. In June 1996 the first municipal elections were held in Mostar. but this was not much more than a formality. Citizens of Mostar voted strongly along nationalistic lines. The representation was based on the pre-war demographic composition of Mostar. 2002: 108). which function as separate bodies. In west side schools pupils learn Croatian language. 2002: 105. These elections were the first in BiH after the Dayton Agreements. 106). although pupils can choose for ethics instead. The same can be said of many institutions. including ‘stari most’ were destroyed. The return of refugees did not go as fast in the first years after the war in Mostar as elsewhere in the country. There was not much left of the once so pretty town of Mostar. Croatian history and have catholic religious classes.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 153 side had become almost 100% Muslim. Schools on the west side have a curriculum that differs from east side schools. The EUAM (European Union Administration of Mostar) had the difficult task of supervising the initial reconstruction and the reintegration of Mostar (Bose. In east side schools pupils learn Bosnian . An important element of division in Mostar is the educational system. Around the front-line all major buildings were ruined.

154

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

language6 Bosnian history and have Islamic religious classes. The gymnasium on Spanish Square in the centre of Mostar is the only school that uses curricula for both Muslims and Croats. This school is the pride of the international community, often given as an example of the success of reintegration Mostar. It is disappointing to see though that even here still classes are separated and that Croatian and Muslim children do not have much mutual contact. Mostar also has two universities, one on the east side and one on the west side. Between the two hardly any cooperation exists. East and West Mostar are marked by division and the two function in many ways as separate cities. Globalisation is another factor that has impact on identity in Mostar as a whole. In his book on globalisation and identity, Appadurai points to the effect of globalisation on, amongst others, BiH (Appadurai, 1999: 305-324). He substantiates that globalisation brings about insecurity in people’s ideas on what their identity is. Old divisions have become less strict and maintaining a specific local identity becomes harder due to the constant influx of information from other parts of the world. According to Appadurai the insecurity about people’s identity is one of the main driving forces behind the horrible violence that came to BiH in the war. Clear boundaries between groups have become more fluid as a result of globalisation. Another result of globalisation; the increase of recourses of information, causes a reverse dynamic. It is nowadays easier for a Muslim in Mostar to feel part of a global Muslim community, than it was 20 years ago. The same can be said of Catholics. Television and Internet enlarge knowledge and awareness of worldwide connections and antagonisms. The growing conflict between the Western world and the Islamic world cannot stay unnoticed in BiH and Mostar. The presence of a large group of foreigners is another factor that impacts identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The recon6 Bosnian and Croatian language are very much alike. Before the war all people in BiH spoke Serbo-Croat. Since the war separate languages exist, although the differences seem in many cases artificial.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

155

struction of BiH after the Dayton agreement attracted many international organisations. Chandler calls BiH the world’s capital of interventionism (Chandler, 1999: 2). People are more and more fed up with the aid of the international community, but at the same time the city became strongly dependent on this foreign aid. Without aid Mostar would turn into an administrative chaos. Reconstruction would stop and for example public transport would probably collapse7 The international community plays a dual role in people’s lives. This relationship of dependency and contempt with the international community also impacts the way Mostarians view themselves and others.

Bosnian Muslim Identity
As I have said earlier, it is difficult say anything about an ethnic group without falling into the pitfall of essentialism. One is inclined to use generalisations. An advantage of my research is that my informants are part of a group that does not seem to fit into any system of categorisation. The Bosnian Muslims form an exception in a predominantly Christian continent. The Bosnian Muslims also form an exception in the Islamic community. Religion is practised in a highly unorthodox way, especially because religion has been suppressed in the communist period. Muslims in the Middle East do not have much in common with Muslims in BiH. I did my fieldwork in an Evangelical Church. The Bosnian Muslims that are part of this church can be seen as an exception to an exceptional group, because although they see themselves as part of the Bosnian Muslim ethnic community, they themselves are Christians8 An oversimplified categorisation is hardly possible in this case. I will first try to give a rough
7 All buses in Mostar have a Japanese flag painted on the side, under which it says that the bus is financed by the Japanese government. 8

The vocabulary is confusing in this matter. Bosnian Muslims form first of all an ethnic category and not a religious category. For most people in this group Islam is used as the main marker in

156

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sketch of the Bosnian Muslim community of Mostar. After that I will describe the Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church. The town of Mostar has a population of about 100,000 people. Approximately half of the population consists of Bosnian Muslims. Although the Muslims of BiH can hardly be compared to Muslims in the Middle East or Turkey, there are many elements in Bosnian Muslim culture that one can trace back to the period of Ottoman occupation. The architecture of the old centre of Mostar and of the biggest part of the east bank differs from the architecture in West Mostar. The Muslim parts of town have small streets with many houses built close together. Some of the architecture has oriental elements. The most important piece of Ottoman architecture is of course the Old Bridge (Stari Most). In the small shops around the Old Bridge Turkish-like artefacts are being sold and Turkish coffee is being served in bars where people play tavla9 In this part of town you hear people say ‘alaikum’as a greeting to each other. Walking around in Mostar’s old town feels a bit like walking in an open-air museum. It does not give a very accurate picture of the everyday life of Bosnian Muslims. In most parts of town one cannot tell which person is a Muslim and which is not. The only Islamic law that is strictly observed is the probation to eat pork. Only a very small proportion of the women wear a head-scarf. The secular character of most Bosnian

their ethnic identity. I use the word term Bosnian Muslim also for those people this group who have converted to Christianity. In most literature the confusion is overcome by using the term Bosniak instead of Bosnian Muslim. This term is hardly ever used by any of my informants. Bosnian Muslims who converted to Christianity nevertheless see themselves mostly as belonging to the ethnic group of Bosnian Muslims. I have chosen to use this emic categorisation. Using the term Bosniak would oversimplify the matter. It is a mixed up reality, not only for the lay outsider, but also for many of my informants themselves.
9

A Turkish board game similar to backgammon.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

157

Muslims has to do with the suppression of religion during the communist period. For a long period of time Muslims were not recognised as an ethnic group of their own. Croats considered them converted Croats, Serbs saw them as converted Serbs. During the Yugoslav period there were no Islamic schools. Muslims from the cities differ in many ways from Muslims in the villages. Bringa shows that traditions play a stronger role in villages than in the cities (Bringa, 1995). A good example in her account is the fact that women change clothes when they go into town. In town they cannot wear their traditional clothes. Of course the situation has changed since Bringa did her research, but I do think that traditions are still much stronger in the villages than in towns like Mostar. In the last 15 years interest in Islam has grown in BiH. The first cause of this development lies in the war. The war hardened the borders between ethnic groups and as I stated before, religion is one of the main markers of difference between groups in BiH. Bosnian Muslim identity is articulated through a shared interest in Islam. A second reason why Islam is taken more seriously recently stems from the global conflict between the west and the Muslim world. People are forced to take sides in this debate. A third cause of the recent revival of Islam in BiH is the financial support that comes from Islamic countries and from Islamic communities in Europe. Throughout the country big mosques are being constructed with help of foreign funds. The Bosnian Muslims that I encountered do not have much interest in Islam. Most Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church consider themselves Christians. However, in many ways they feel part of the Bosnian Muslim community. Their focus is on East Mostar and they speak Bosnian instead of Croatian10 They go to Muslim schools, support FK Veleæ, (the east side football team) and are proud
10

There is not much difference between Bosnian and Croatian, but the small differences are important to people. If I want to buy bread in East Mostar I have to use a totally different word for bread then in West Mostar.

158 Teoloãki åasopis. Apart from daily meals and cigarettes they did not have much expenditure. They lived in a small house with their two sons and two daughters and one grandson. A good example is Boris. Boris did not believe in Islam. The house they lived in was only half finished. he and his family lived in Mostar. Boris’ father died when Boris was young. Costs of living are not so high. Altogether it was just enough to get by. . The daily pursuits consisted mainly of drinking Bosnian coffee and smoking. The majority of their family and close friends are Bosnian Muslims. he is a middle-aged man who has been going to the Evangelical Church in Mostar for a few years. Boris grew up in the old town of Mostar. Neither Boris nor his wife had regular jobs. They were kicked out of their house and moved in with his sister who is now also sometimes coming to church. During the war. It was his son who convinced him to come to church. The Mostar he grew up in was a town where it did not matter what religious background one had. He went to communist schools in Mostar and in Montenegro. Just after I left Mostar the oldest son started to look after some goats. He became a Christian after the war. His parents were Partisans during the Second World War. According to Boris. Mostar used to be the best city of the whole of Yugoslavia. The only big difference is that their religious identity is Christian. N° 9 of the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sometimes Boris was studying some kind of textbook about Christianity. One daughter has moved abroad where she got married to a former peace-force soldier. It seemed like the work on the first floor and the roof had stagnated a while ago. They received help from a humanitarian organisation that was connected to the Evangelical Church. His wife is also a Bosnian Muslim and she does not go to church. They also had a small plot of land where they grew some vegetables. The television was always turned on very loud. Apparently the family lived on support from this daughter and from the church. He never prayed until he became a Christian and the only reason why he regarded himself as a Bosnian Muslim was that his father told him so. His father was an Imam in Mostar and his grandparents owned much land in the vicinity of Mostar. Although his father had been a religious leader. whom she met in Mostar. although nobody was really watching.

They say that these Bosnian Croats are more Croatian than the Croats in Zagreb.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 159 Boris’ situation is in many ways typical of most of the Bosnian Muslims that come to church. The town of Medjugorje is one of the world’s largest places of pilgrimage. Although they definitely consider themselves as Bosnian Muslims. Catholicism is the most important marker of identity. . I think this joke tells a lot about the way ethnic identity is being articulated by Bosnian Croats in Mostar. Every year thousands of Catholics from all over the world come to Medjugorje be- 11 Although Boris’ father had been an Imam. they have a marginal position in this community. The red and white chequered flag hangs from almost every lamppost. His upbringing had been more communist than Islamic and his father died when Boris was still really young. Bosnian Croat Identity In Zagreb people make fun about the Bosnian Croats in Western Herzegovina. I have not met any Bosnian Muslims in church that were part of a family in which Islam played a very significant role11 It is striking that of the evangelical Bosnian Muslims only a small minority lives on the east side of Mostar. Bosnian Croats are proud to be catholic and are in many ways devoted to the church. mainly through humanitarian aid. Even the smallest villages in this region have a Catholic church building. I do not think Islam played a significant role in his life. The part of Herzegovina west of the Neretva River has been the cradle of hard-line Croatian nationalists. It is also typical that he was not very religious before he became a Christian. The evangelical Bosnian Muslims cannot really be considered part of the core of this ethnic group. Most of them are relatively poor and came in contact with the church during the war or shortly after.

When there is a sports event the Bosnian Croats are always supporting the Croatian teams and when BiH looses a football match. Faith is connected to the Croatian nation in a very direct way. Although most tourist businesses are mainly centred in the old Ottoman part of town. Masses are being attended frequently by most Bosnian Croats. Most of the streets are much wider and there are many big apartment blocks. the atmosphere in West Mostar is much more similar to Western Europe than it is in East Mostar. even at night. On the whole. The commercial centre is much more developed than on the east side. One of the highest Church towers in Europe has been built in Mostar and as I mentioned before the giant Cross on mount Hum is visible from every corner of town. Two big shopping malls have been built after the war where almost anything is for sale that one could buy in Western Europe. Where East Mostar has many narrow streets. The 50. . This is visible from the cars that people drive and the clothes that people wear. This was reason for a lot of grief in West Mostar. On a wall in West Mostar somebody has put this clearly into words with spray-paint: od is Croatian The architectural differences between West and East Mostar are striking. most of the other economical activity is to be found in West Mostar.000 Bosnian Croats in Mostar seem to be wealthier than their east side neighbours.160 Teoloãki åasopis. the opposite is true for West Mostar. when it is illuminated. Bosnian Croats celebrate this by driving around town waving Croatian flags. at least among most Catholics. During my stay Pope John Paul II died. Secularisation as in Western Europe seems nearly absent in present day Herzegovina. N° 9 cause of the supposed apparitions of Maria since 198112 In Mostar Catholicism also plays an important role in the expression of Croatian identity. Bosnian Croats seem to feel related more to Croatia than to BiH. Most of the Bosnian Croats that I interviewed for my re12 The work of Bax (Bax: 1995) provides an extensive anthropological analysis of the developments of the catholic regime in Medjugorje.

for Bosnian Croats there is more to loose. even though their relationship with the Catholic Church was quite exceptional. For this reason it is impossible for most of them to come to the Evangelical Church on Sunday. Breaking with the Catholic Church would cause a break with their family and it would mean a betrayal of their ethnic group. She was baptised in the Evangelical Church in 1996. because it would cause big problems within their family. In the previous section I said that most Evangelical Bosnian Muslims do not live in East Mostar. She says about her ethnic background: "I can’t say that I’m not glad that I’m Croatian. They keep their involvement with evangelical Christians a secret. She is a 25-year-old Bosnian Croatian woman. Therefore. Half of my family is Orthodox.” Before Helena became part of the Evangelical Church she only went to the Catholic Church at Easter and Christmas. Joining the Evangelical Church did not really mean a break with the church or with her family. or I don’t hate Serbs.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 161 search were in many ways proud to be Croatian. For other Bosnian Croats who are involved in the Evangelical Church this is a lot more problematic. I don’t hate Muslims. Taking this step would implicate a big risk. but I’m glad I’m Croatian. but I am glad that I am Croatian. The majority of the Bosnian Croats I interviewed are part of families that are better of than the families of Bosnian Muslims in Church. It is interesting that all Bosnian Croats that had some connection to the Evangelical Church do live in West Mostar. Many of the young people that come to worship meetings on Wednesdays have never told their family about their baptism. . Helena is an interesting example. I am for a lot of stuff…I live here on the west side and it’s a lot nicer. Sunday morning they go to the mass with their families. that is really a lot easier for me…I don’t really hate anyone. I hang around with both. Helena lives in West Mostar and has a fairly good job. I have a Croatian Passport.

for many individuals it is not so clear. Some of the pastors in BiH have studied at the evangelical theological seminary in Osijek in Croatia. Since I did my fieldwork in the Evangelical Church. I have separately discussed the identity of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. There is no Baptist church in Mostar. This denomination is connected to the Evangelical Churches in Croatia. and many people only come once in a while to activities organised by the church. As I have said before. It is therefore really difficult to estimate how big this group of evangelical Christians is. Religious background determines the group a person belongs to. The church in Mostar that I studied is part of the denomination of Evangelical/Pentecostal churches in BiH. although it is clear that some people are definitely part of the church and some are not. N° 9 Evangelical Identity in Mostar So far. During my fieldwork I have visited many different meetings. In BiH there are two main denominations of protestant churches: Baptist churches and Evangelical/Pentecostal churches. almost all my informants were in some way or another involved with the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The church has no official membership. At all these meetings I met different groups of people. However. other young people only come to worship meetings on . Many people are in some way or another involved in the church. 1995). all of them differ from the majority of their ethnic group when it comes to religion. There are no clear boundaries that determine who is in and who is out. For example. religion is the main determinant for most people in Mostar to distinguish between ethnic groups.162 Teoloãki åasopis. others only came to one particular kind of meeting. Although all of them saw themselves as part of an ethnic group that transcended the church. It is hard to define the Evangelical Church. This was for many of them of crucial importance for the way they constructed their identity. some young people only come to the youth meetings on Sunday night. Some people come to almost every meeting. The church in Mostar was founded by Christians from Croatia (Kelly and Sheppard. It is therefore very important for the evangelical Christians in Mostar that they belong to the evangelical Christian community.

13 There are refugee camps in the vicinity of Mostar. Gypsies and some people from England and the United States. A normal Sunday morning church service is usually attended by Bosnian Muslims. The pastor of the church is from a mixed Serb/Croat background. Bosnian Croats. Most of the young people are still in school except for some of the refugees. Hardly any students come to church although there are two universities in Mostar. Most evangelicals in the Mostar church are people with limited opportunities. Most people that live in these camps have come from Kosovo and some from Macedonia. Sometimes 25 people come. People from both East and West Mostar are attending the Brankovac church meetings. I did most of my research in the Brankovac church in East Mostar. but some activities there are attended by people from both congregations. The people that come to church activities come from a very mixed ethnical background. On these meetings there is usually not one dominant ethnic group. On youth meetings on Sunday evening the majority of people is usually Bosnian Muslim and a relatively big group of refugees from other parts of the Balkans attend these meetings13 The number of people that come to these meetings changes a lot. On average around 30 to 40 people come to these meetings.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 163 Wednesday night and some come to both. Just like any other social group the Evangelical Church has core members and members that take a less central position. Many people are without a job or have low paid jobs. Kosovo Albanians. Usually about 8-10 people come to these meetings and they are all young people. Significantly. . Many of the refugees are illiterate. On Wednesday evening worship meetings the majority of attendants is Bosnian Croat. In each of the buildings meetings are being held. sometimes only a handful show up. the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: one in East and one in West Mostar. Most of the people that come to church did not have much education.

A. This is especially the case in the West Mostar church. Usually these groups come during the summer to work for one of the charity organisations.S. the songs that are sung. Most of these people work in Mostar as missionaries for charity organisations. says for example:‘The vision of Novi Most International is to see young people in Bosnia Herzegovina bringing hope to their country by being instruments of positive transformation. Most young people that come to meetings do not go to the church service on Sunday morning. The presence of people from Western Europe and the U.novimost.S. Most charity organisations provide humanitarian aid and combine this with evangelising activities.164 Teoloãki åasopis. God is calling this generation of young Bosnians to be agents of positive transformation of their nation. Another relatively big share of the make-up of the church consists of foreign aid workers. This international character of the church gives the members the idea that they are part of a trans-national network. all are very similar to the way these things are done in a Dutch or in an American Evangelical Church. has quite a big impact on the identity of the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Most of them speak some Bosnian or Croatian. but also in the Brankovac church.A. The reconstruction of Mostar attracted many of these missionaries. In the first place the foreigners add up to the international character of the church. Many of them have been in Bosnia for more than 5 years.. The vision statement of one of these organisations.html . The way a service is organised. the way in which people pray. or both of the parents come to church.org/page4.. Most of the time only those come of whom one. Almost all the songs are translated American worship songs. 14 http://www. come for a short period to Mostar. Usually about 5 to 10 people from Britain and the USA come to church services on Sunday morning. though to a lesser degree. N° 9 Most men in the church are under 25 and in general men are a minority in most church activities. called Novi Most.’ 14 Sometimes groups of missionaries from England or the U. Somebody once said to me: ‘You will never find any Bosnian culture in the Evangelical Church in Mostar’.

2003). are more easily attracted than people that already belong to such a network. Muslims see baptism as a really big step. Some people were challenged in their motivations for coming to church. Both Croats and Muslims are very hesitant to be baptised in the even those who have been involved with the church for a long period of time. In many ways the presence of foreigners and the contacts with foreign churches pull a specific group of people towards the church. During and in the first few years after the war. Some people in church call these people ‘rice Christians’. In this period many people stopped coming to church. Often being outside of . Poor people are more attracted to a group that provides some material aid than rich people. People have told me that in the past this was more often the case. Apart from material benefits another factor that pulls people to the church is the idea of belonging to a group that provides a secure environment is. The Pentecostal religious network offers a similar kind of security and identity as the youth gangs do.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 165 Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez discuss the importance of trans-national religious networks in an article on trans-national youth gangs and Pentecostal churches (Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez. The Pentecostal churches offer an alternative trans-national network to these people. For Bosnian Muslims and Croats being baptised in the Evangelical Church is seen as a betrayal of their ethnicity. For some Muslim people it means breaking all the ties with the family. It is not surprising therefore that so many refugees have some sort of relationship with the church. In Mostar the international character of the church also provides church members with a sense of belonging to a trans-national network. Those people that are not part of a network that gives them security and a place of belonging. They show that young people from El Salvador who come from poor and powerless backgrounds find security and identity in international youth gangs. The leaders in church have been cautious to render too much material aid. But the same is also the case for Bosnian Croats who join the Evangelical Church. In the last years the church has tried to make this group of rice Christians smaller. many people came to church because of material benefits.

Another contradictory example is Mehmed. The insecure situation of Mostar creates the need for closely-knit groups that create a secure environment. Most people in Mostar find this security in one of the two major ethnic groups. Her mother was shocked by the news. For others the causes of marginality are less obvious. But this would not do justice to the reality that I encountered in Mostar. She had kept it a secret for a long time. Ethnicity does not seem to play a big role in church. This brings material benefits. This makes suffering in this world easier and gives people hope for a better future. They have a totally different ethnic background and just do not belong to one of the groups. In the Evangelical Church people not only find a safe group. they also benefit from the presence of many international people. Many people go through difficult situations because of their choice to become part of the Evangelical Church. This is the case for both Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. There are various possible reasons why some people do not find enough protection in one the major groups. From my analysis one could conclude that people exclusively come to church to improve their situation.166 Teoloãki åasopis. For this reason many refugees are outsiders in Mostar. sometimes they don’t have the right connections. who wore . an old Bosnian Muslim man. it seems obvious. For some groups. Nevertheless people choose to speak out for their faith. N° 9 networks and being poor go hand in hand. now become citizens of a heavenly kingdom. Religion is the most important marker of identity for both of these groups. For these people the Evangelical Church has a lot to offer. The Evangelical Church provides a safe environment for people from all ethnic groups. It also makes people part of a larger international network. He was beaten up by Roman Catholics Christians. Some Mostarians cannot find security in either one of these groups. Furthermore it provides people with a conviction of hope. People that were marginalized in Mostar. People from their own ethnic group see them as traitors. During the war in Mostar he was put in a prison camp by Bosnian Croats for the simple reason that he was a Muslim. like refugees. Sometimes it is because they live outside of town. Religious identity is therefore of great importance. Just after I left Mostar a Bosnian Croat girl told her mother about her baptism.

Reconciliation Since my first encounter with evangelical Christians in BiH I have been puzzled by the fact that some people from different ethnic backgrounds seem to get along so well in this community. I wanted to know if it was real or fake unity and I wanted to know where this apparent unity came from if it happened to be real. I now want to analyse the way in which I encountered reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. This example shows that although sociological factors have a lot of impact.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 167 a picture of Jesus on their uniforms. In this prison he saw some kind of vision of Jesus. people do have freedom to make personal choices. both churches have a very mixed group of attendants. a repetition of the disastrous events remains an unlikely but realistic possibility. I will first discuss the role of reconciliation in the church. Nevertheless. The first time I saw a group of evangelicals worship together in unity it fascinated me. Much has been written about strategies of reconciliation. The main question of this article concerns the role of the reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. As long as people do not reconcile on a local level. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church The Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: One in East Mostar and one in West Mostar. The west side . but my primary focus is on a grassroots level. Therefore I will also describe the role of ethnicity during church activities and outside of church matter. conflict resolution and peace building in BiH. Most scholars focus on the importance of macro-political and macro-economical factors. This role has a lot to do with the way people deal with matters of ethnicity in church. In this sense the church seems to take part in the division of Mostar. If the conflict between normal citizens is not resolved. viable peace is impossible. After he was released from prison he decided to become a Christian and join the Evangelical Church.

you cannot change overnight and deny something that was implanted in you for such a long time. . At the moment most people in church do not really seem to know why there are two buildings. The Christian symbol of the cross. These Muslims are living in a homogeneous Muslim environment and might feel unwelcome in a church where a lot of Christian symbolism is used. ethnicity was supposed to play a minor role in church activities. In my research I mainly focused on the church in East Mostar. The church in East Mostar was started in 1997 to create a place where Bosnian Muslims from east Mostar feel welcome. Strangely enough a rather large proportion of the people that come to the East side church lives in West Mostar. That means for Bosnian Croats and for those Bosnian Muslims who live in a predominantly Christian environment and are therefore used to Christian symbolism. In the same interview with Ivan he clearly states that from the beginning of the church. A person has to loose these things when he or she joins the church. why the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two buildings. but that later the churches developed in a way that does not match with this strategy. one of the leaders of the church in Mostar. but it is incomprehensible with the fact that so many people from West Mostar go to the church on the East side. People from both East and West Mostar both attend the services in this church. N° 9 church is attended by a slight majority of Bosnian Croats and the East side church has a slight majority of Bosnian Muslims. Nationalism and ethnic pride are not very much accepted in the Evangelical Church. I believe that the idea of having two church buildings originated from this difference in strategy. He explained to me that both churches have a different strategy of evangelism. In an interview I asked Ivan.168 Teoloãki åasopis. The church in West Mostar has a strategy of evangelism that is designed for people who live in West Mostar. About nationalism of the Bosnian Croats Ivan said: “Roman Catholic background people are more connected to being Croatian and are more proud of that and while actually coming to the Evangelical Church slowly you are losing that…I would say that it’s a process. This sounds like a logical explanation for the two church buildings. for example is not used in this church.

This is seen as a spiritual goal. but there are no activities organised with the aim of bringing ethnic groups closer together.” It is not very surprising that ethnicity does not play a major role during church activities. Of course the violent break up of Yugoslavia has made many people sceptic about the value of this supposed unity under communist rule. During church activities Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats get along without paying attention to each other’s ethnic background. Although ethnic groups mix in the Evangelical Church. This is an unintended way of bringing ethnic groups closer together. Reconciliation between ethnic groups does not have anything to do with this spiritual goal for most people in church. .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 169 It’s a process. The church does not play an active role in promoting reconciliation between ethnic groups in Mostar. The foremost goal of the church is to reach people with the message of Jesus Christ. In the Evangelical Church avoiding suppressing issues of ethnicity creates a situation that is comparable to the situation during the communist regime. This situation is a result from the fact that people are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in church. Of course reconciliation with God and forgiveness play a role in church. He said that people have to get along in church irrespectively of their ethnic background. The Evangelical Church tries to stay away from all political matters. the life of Christ living in a person and slowly those things are dying. This is an interesting comparison. Ivan compared the situation in the Evangelical Church to the situation during the communist period. For decennia communism seemed able to have relative success in uniting the different ethnic groups of Yugoslavia. During the communist period all ethnic groups in Yugoslavia lived together with the motto ‘Bratstvo i Jedinstvo’ (brotherhood and unity). but the church has an impact on the way church people construct their ethnic identity. People that come to church have relatively much contact with people from a different ethnic background. reconciliation between ethnic groups is not part of the agenda of the church. For the church this is too much a political matter. In that sense the church does play a role in the reconciliation process.

The pastor of the Brankovac church and his wife are both from a mixed Croat/Serb background. N° 9 The next question is of course if this unity stretches beyond the walls of the church. I have also interviewed church people about their ideas on ethnicity. but also on other occasions that had not much to do with the church. He explained to me that some people outside the church thought that the Evangelical Church was a church for people from a mixed background. An important question that I will discuss is therefore: how far do the relationships between people from different ethnic background in the church stretch? It could be possible that the apparent unity does not stretch beyond the church door. The years of shared ideology could not prevent the harsh conflict that broke out in 1991. There are few occasions in which Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats voluntarily come together. but also Kosovo Albanians. In my fieldwork I have observed people during church meetings. At almost all activities that I visited. In my research I have tried to find out more about what lies behind this apparent unity. Furthermore there often were some people from mixed ethnic background. people were present from various ethnic backgrounds. . In my research I have tried to find out if this unity that I encountered in church is also continued in the life of church people. First of all I want to describe the role of ethnicity in the activities organised by the Evangelical Church. Because of its clarity. this phenomenon was more the cause than the object of my research. Usually these people were not just Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats.170 Teoloãki åasopis. Gypsies and Serbs. The Role of Ethnicity in the Life of Church People There is no need for thorough research to come to the conclusion that the Evangelical Church is a place where ethnic groups mix in a way that is uncommon outside of church. Scepticism towards brotherhood and unity during communism has proved right.

but that they just did not have so much contact with them. As I said earlier ethnicity does not play a foremost role during church activities. the less the importance of ethnicity. It was a topic that was not spoken about much. the church more and more defines one’s identity. It therefore was a solid group and it was hard for outsiders to become part of that group. Marco. For all those who had a leading position in the church. The Wednesday night worship meetings where almost only visited by Bosnian Croats. Of course sometimes people for whom ethnicity is an important issue came to church activities. People are in the first place evangelical Christian and not Bosnian Muslim. Ethnicity is part of the old identity. As one becomes part of the church. There is one church related activity that is not attended by a mixed group of people. On most occasions one or two people from a different background were present. ethnicity played a minor role. be- . Perhaps non-Croats did not feel welcome because it is such a homogeneous group of Bosnian Croats.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 171 During meetings it usually took me a while to find out people’s ethnic background. Bosnian Croat or Albanian. First of all these meetings were always held in West Mostar and therefore all the people that came lived in West Mostar. In the interviews I had with some of the young people who come to these worship meetings they all told me that they had no problems with Bosnian Muslims. but they did not have a central role during the meetings. but it was not like on most other church-related activities. Secondly. because many people didn’t know to which group others belonged. the pastor of the East side church explained to me that for many people ethnicity still plays a big role when they just start coming to church. They all live in West Mostar and go to Catholic schools. This determines the majority of their relationships. Most of them do not go to Sunday services in the Evangelical Church. organised several years ago by an American missionary among Bosnian Croatian children. Almost all the people that came to the worship meetings got involved with evangelical Christianity through this project. Sometimes it caused a lot of confusion when I tried to find out what a person’s ethnic background was. the worship group had evolved out of an evangelism project. The longer they are evangelical Christian. There are several factors that explain this.

More and more 15 During my stay Novi Most moved to a new location in Mostar. The worship group is exceptional because it is predominantly visited by Bosnian Croats. I also had to observe and be part of people’s life outside of church affairs. Before their club building had been in East Mostar. Ethnicity does not seem to play a significant role in these meetings. the more he or she becomes part of a new network of people. People become friends with other people they meet in church activities. I only spent four months in Mostar. . They go for coffee with one another and help each other with practical matters. They actively try to get more Bosnian Croatian children involved and more children from the West Mostar schools. they pray with each other and for one another. N° 9 cause they join their families to the mass. People get along with one another in church like nothing happened in the past.172 Teoloãki åasopis. This is not enough to participate in the lives of all church people. Some of them also got more involved with Novi Most. Like I said. On the one hand it became clear to me that on the long term people build relationships in church that go beyond church matters. In many ways this was a difficult task. The longer a person is part of the church. People from different groups talk with each other. They mainly worked with Bosnian Muslims and refugees. One of the young people from this group started to come to church weekly and two others started to come once in a while. During my research this pattern began to change. They wanted to get more children from West Mostar involved and therefore moved to a new location close to the former frontline. most activities are visited by an ethnically mixed group of people. Outside of church activities I met only a small group of people frequently and this group consisted mainly of young people. The next important question is how far this apparent peaceful coexistence stretches. an evangelical youth organisation in Mostar15 They start to build stronger relationships with other people that are involved in the Evangelical Church and this automatically means that they also develop more relationships with people from other ethnic backgrounds. To get a more complete picture of people’s lives.

predominantly consists of other Bosnian Muslims.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 173 relationships are being built of mutual dependency. Most of them had been friends for a long time and in many cases there was some kind of blood-tie. One evening I was on a birthday party of Amela. It is not surprising that most of the family members belong to the same ethnic group. have become part of a very diverse social network. I found that in many cases evangelical Christians stay attached to their ethnic group outside of church activities. all guests were Bosnian Muslims. a Bosnian Croatian girl who comes to Sunday services in the Brankovac church. She helps out with the youth work. Except from some British and Americans. on the long term relationships will be built in the church that have an impact on people’s whole lives and also their relationships. Some people. However. Outside church affairs people maintain strong relationships with people from their own ethnic group. A good example is Dijana. a girl from a Bosnian Muslim family. However. The church does not have much impact on these relationships. people also stay part of other social networks. Generally speaking the ethnic unification is not the same outside of church affairs as it is during church activities. On her birthday party I did not see any Bosnian Croats. For a person who lives in West Mostar and attends a school or works in this part of town. who have been going to church for a long time. They maintain strong relationships with other people in their ethnic group who are not part of the Evangelical Church. Her friends are mainly people from church. Family relationships are for many Bosnians of great importance. In contrast to the previous example of Amela. Unintentionally everyone becomes part of the division and reproduces it. She has lived most of her life in West Mostar and has been going to the Evangelical Church since her early childhood. Almost every time I met her she was hanging out with other young people from church. Nevertheless it is striking that also the network of evangelical Bosnian Muslims that live in the Croatian part of Mostar. Dijana has a group of friends from a very . In Mostar this is almost unavoidable due to the all-embracing division of the city. it is very difficult to build and maintain relationships with someone who lives on the other side of town.

As far as I know. Much of the division along ethnic lines that characterises present-day Mostar and BiH is not present in the Evangelical Church. He loves going to these worship meetings. No one can completely avoid it. and his relationship with Bosnian Croat friends has not changed. where he is often the only Bosnian Muslim among Bosnian Croats. Young people grow up with the division and sooner or later it will affect them in some way. The following anecdote shows this. Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that ethnicity still plays an important role in people’s lives.174 Teoloãki åasopis. One day I met Amir and he looked like he had been in a fight. This example shows how hard it is to avoid the conflict in Mostar. but also difficult objectives of most peace building organisations. Amir never took revenge. N° 9 diverse ethnic background. About a year ago he has been baptised in the Evangelical Church and ever since he has been very much involved in church matters. He also goes to Wednesday night worship meetings. Amir is an 18 year old Bosnian Muslim. a group of Bosnian Croats had come up to him and had asked him for his name. when he was walking around in West Mostar. Many organisations in Mostar attempt to create spaces where Bosnian Muslims and . He told me that the previous night. Then the group started to beat him up because they knew he was a Bosnian Muslim. also in the lives of evangelical Christians. A youth leader from the Evangelical Church spoke to him about how he should try to forgive the people that beat him up. Integration of ethnic groups is one of the most important. Several weeks after this event Amir was still scared to go to West Mostar. is a small part of the post-war reconciliation process in the whole of Mostar and of BiH. which he did not have. In many ways this process of integration seems to be happening in the Evangelical Church. despite his anger. The contrasting examples of Amela and Dijana show that it is very difficult to draw general conclusions about the unifying effect of the church. He did not want to tell his name and then they asked for his identification card. The situation in the Evangelical Church differs in many ways from the situation in other social groups. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Amir was of course not able to defend himself against a whole group of men.

their lives and their social networks. but evangelical. The division of Mostar has a lot of impact on people. Conclusion Shortly after the celebration of erection of the statue of Bruce Lee in Mostar. In the Evangelical Church people are called to forgive each other. People are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in the process of becoming part of the Evangelical Church. outside of church matters this integration appears to be less strong. This does of course not mean that they always will. This is mostly also a gradual process. In the Evangelical Church this is already the case for several years. In church people are expected to start a new life with Jesus irrespective of their ethnic background. although it is not one of it’s objectives. Outside of church activities the radical change of people’s lives appears often far more gradual.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 175 Bosnian Croats can get in contact with each other. This has an effect on people’s ideas about ethnicity and about matters concerning reconciliation. People change their moral standards and their ideas about forgiveness in the process of becoming an evangelical Christian. Therefore ethnicity is not to have an important role during church activities. Over time this has an effect on people’s lives. In fact reconciliation does not play an active role in the church. Their new identity is neither Muslim nor Croat. What is left now is the empty pedestal. In many ways the . At the same time there is also a change in convictions. the statue that was to symbolize unity was destroyed by vandals. but it does influence behaviour. The primary objective of the church is to spread their message of Jesus Christ and most of it’s activities are focussed on this. However outside of church activities ethnicity often continues to play an important role in the life of evangelical Christians in Mostar. So although in church people from different ethnic groups seem very much integrated. The more a person becomes part of the Evangelical Church the more his or her social environment changes. This is also the case for church people.

This means that they are not part of one of the main religious groups and it is religion that for most people defines their ethnic identity. In this final paragraph I will draw some conclusions. In a town where the division between ethnic groups determines nearly everything. Ethnic differences do not play an important role in the church. Almost none of the people that I studied during my fieldwork fit into the main categories in Mostar.176 Teoloãki åasopis. this is a striking phenomenon. But this is only a very small community and there are reservations to be made about the way in which reconciliation is established in the Evangelical Church. Belonging to a group offers human security in the precarious circumstances of Mostar. The result is that the Evangelical Church in Mostar consists of people from various ethnic backgrounds. One is tempted to become pessimistic when one is confronted with present-day Mostar. People who neither adhere to the catholic nor to the Islamic faith are in a comparable marginalised position. Unintended Reconciliation The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for close-knit communities. I have tried to write about one of the small sections of society in which there is some reason for hope. the evangelical community defines their new identity. In the Evangelical Church in Mostar some cautious steps towards reconciliation are being made. a trans-national network to belong to and material aid. It is a monument for all the fruitless efforts to unify Mostar. In fact ethnicity in general is a subject that seems to be avoided in church. When people join the church. In this article I have discussed the role of reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Being part of the evangelical community is therefore of crucial importance for them. Some pessimists would say that reconciliation is not possible at all. For those people church offers a local community. It is the only religious group in Mostar that is ethnically mixed. N° 9 empty pedestal is a symbol in itself. Rebuilding Mostar is a slow and laborious project. The main reason for this is that they all belong to the Evangelical Church in some way or another. When a person becomes part of the Evangelical .

Reconciliation is a process that needs a lot of time. However. This ethnic mix is possible because issues of ethnicity are intentionally avoided. would be a premature conclusion that the reconciliation process does not play any role in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The church does not have any strategies to reconcile people from different ethnic groups. First of all they find a strong community. Building bridges across the gap between Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats does not happen overnight. not with the objective of overcoming the division that is so present in Mostar. The intended role of reconciliation might be minimal but in the Evangelical Church reconciliation between people does take place. Many of these efforts are fruitless. By joining the Evangelical Church one becomes a citizen of a heavenly kingdom. Reconciliation is too much a political issue and the church does not want to be involved in political matters. People from different ethnic background come together. The conflict in Mostar has created two groups that have no urgent need to interact. The people who come to church have common interests in going to church. In this way prejudices can be overcome and people can start building relationships with people from other groups. outside of church activities ethnicity does play a role in the life of evangelical Christians. Many of the people . They benefit from coming to church in various ways. A Bosnian Muslim can live his whole life in East Mostar and a Bosnian Croat has no need to go to East Mostar. A safe environment is created for people from all different ethnic groups by largely avoiding issues concerning ethnicity. This makes integration a very difficult objective.However. One of the reasons for this is that it is not easy to find matters of common interest. People’s social life is often strongly influenced by one’s ethnic background. yet in a more unplanned way.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 177 Church he is expected to replace some of his ethnic identity by an evangelical Christian identity. In Mostar much effort is put into creating places where Muslims and Croats can meet.The first objective of the church is to reach people with its message about Jesus. Reconciliation is not one of the main objectives of the Evangelical Church. but in order to worship their God.

The presence of foreign aid workers in church is something church people often benefit from in a direct way. I do not think that is the case. When a person joins a religious group this has an effect on his personal system of meaning making. material aid or a change of convictions and these people are present in every ethnic group in Mostar. Evangelical Christianity gives people very clear goals in life and it gives people hope for a better future. Often people return to their own ethnic groups outside of church matters. Secondly people benefit in material ways from being part of the church. N° 9 who come to church would otherwise be marginalised. It is especially attractive for those people who are in need of a strong community. This explains the ethnic diversity in church. The integration of ethnic groups in the church is an unintended spin-off effect of the church. This integration creates good ground for reconciliation. Thirdly. people’s convictions change. in the process of becoming part of a church. Many of the people in church come from a poor and powerless background. the church is part of a trans-national network. Maybe this will slowly change in the future when stronger relationships are being built among church people. Being part of such a community gives otherwise marginalised people a strong sense of belonging. People are often unaware of the social conditions that have an impact on the choices they make. Maybe reconciliation should become an intentional objective for the church. Being part of a network offers people very practical opportunities. People start to build relationships with people from different ethnic backgrounds. Many of them do not fit automatically in one of the main groups in Mostar. However this is still a slow process and the integration does not stretch far beyond church activities. I defined religion as part of the total framework of systems of meaning making. However . So far the effect of the church on the rest of Mostar is relatively small. Church provides a local community and furthermore.178 Teoloãki åasopis. These benefits attract people from all different ethnic background. By becoming part of the church they acquire a place in a strong network. From this perspective it may seem like people join the church in a very calculating way.

pp. S. In: Goddard. 305-324. 1966 The social Construction of Reality New York: Anchor Books. Th. (eds. P.L.L. Baumann. 1967 The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion New York: Doubleday. Bibliography Appadurai. (ed. Boissevain. pp. Ethnic. Nationalist Partition and International Intervention London: Hurst and Company. 1994 Towards an Anthropology of European Communities. The Anthropology of Europe. G. and Religious Identities London: Routledge. .). Bax. 2002 Bosnia after Dayton. Bose. A. P. 1995 Medjugorje: Religion Politics. Berger. J. In: Meyer. Berger. and Violence in Rural Bosnia Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. Rethinking National.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 179 in some ways it could serve as a model for many organisations who try to reconcile people in Mostar. 41-56. and Geschiere P. Oxford: Berg. Globalization and Identity Oxford: Blackwell. M. V.) 1994. 1999 The Multicultural Riddle. A. 1999 Certainty: Ethnic Violence in the Era of Globalization. and Luckmann. B.

Vásquez. G. Kelly.180 Teoloãki åasopis. Zaitchik. J. 2002 Ethnicity and Nationalism London: Pluto Press. (1995). T. H. 2006 Mostar’s little dragon. 1995 The protean self: human resilience in an age of fragmentation. R. M. .com/archives/2006/04/01/mostars-littledragon. Manuel A.) 2002 A Reader in the Anthropology of Religion Malden/Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 1995 Being Muslim the Bosnian way. Eriksen. (ed. A. Chandler. Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village. Faking Democracy after Dayton London: Pluto Press. 1995 Miracle in Mostar Oxford: Lion Publishing. York: Basic Books. Lambek. and Sheppard. 2000 Bosnia. April 2006. Lifton. D. and Marie Friedmann Marquardt 2003 Globalizing the Sacred. Religion across the Americas London: Rutgers University Press. T. URL:http://reason. N° 9 Bringa. L. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 181 .

182 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 PREGLEDNI RADOVI .

incomparable. “There are no commonplace. thought.”1 Fr. but nothing in that creation is on a continuum with him: God is not the “ultimate” member in a chain of being. All else came into being only by his creative activity. In himself. And within it. that God Almighty is “Maker of heaven and earth. in the words of the Nicene Creed. This is not so only because we are finite: it is because he is transcendent.C e n t u r y In this 21st century. God is and forever will remain beyond us— incomprehensible. Orthodoxy confesses..2010 Pregledni Ålanak An Orthodox World View For Life In The 21 .2010 Prihvañeno: 30.” God made but is utterly different from his creation.03. and of all things visible and invisible. and ineffable. all matters are seen in their spiritual dimensions and significance. or anything else. Let us now consider briefly your Orthodox “Christian outlook” (to borrow Fr.. education.96"20" Primljeno: 25. Yelchaninov’s designation).. Yelchaninov recognized that Orthodoxy’s worldview includes the whole of creation. and all vocations.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dr. Jim Payton 183 UDK 281. you Orthodox—here in Serbia and in other Eastern European countries—have a new opportunity to influence your society with your rich heritage. society. Even our recognition of our limitations in speaking of him can only be . with the collapse of Communist restrictions and the opportunity to live as God’s faithful in freedom. One of the renowned Russian Orthodox leaders of the past recognized this Orthodox potential: Father Alexander Yelchaninov said.03. non-religious matters: The ‘Christian outlook’ is one whole.

” as God pronounced it at the end of his creative work.3 While what he created was utterly different from the Creator. “the visible and the invisible”. who enjoyed a special place in the creation. The one who.2 And yet. Orthodoxy—fol- . moves.6 As both St. Gregory Palamas has reminded us. human beings were placed in the Garden of Eden. and future in the God who made and sustained it. Gregory of Nyssa and St. N° 9 couched in thoughts and terms derived from our created human intellectual capacities. God is nearer to his creation than we can grasp. the material and the immaterial. But it still had to develop. but only in him.5 The cosmos only had meaning. This was true for all of creation. human beings participated in both realms. offering all the wonders of creation. God is beyond even our awareness that he is beyond us. while human beings were greatly privileged to be thus the only microcosm of all the rest of creation. In stark contrast to ancient Greek philosophy’s endorsement of the eternally static and unchanging as the ultimate good. By using the gifts God had given them as his image-bearers. John of Damascus taught. Orthodoxy stresses that God made the creation dynamic. and God had built into all creation the potential with which it should develop. they were even more greatly privileged to bear the image of God. life. Humanity was to serve as priests. in philosophical terminology. God made human beings as the only creatures who would share equally in both the realms of creation—in the words of the Nicene Creed. that Creator nevertheless was the one in whom the entire creation “lives. as St. and has its being. humans were to manifest the greatness of God’s creation by bringing to light and fruition all that God had prepared the creation to become. in his energies. Composed of body and soul. in its future development. under the leadership of his human vice-regents. in his essence.8 to bring out the fullness of its potential to the glory of God.7 As God’s image-bearers. to God’s praise. they were positioned at the intersection of everything else in creation and called to work with that creation. is utterly transcendent is. absolutely immanent. It was “very good.”4 God did not make the creation self-sustaining: it could have no life in itself.9 since it was complete and harmonious.184 Teoloãki åasopis. it was true also for humanity.

depending thus on what had no life in itself. The creation should develop over time. our first parents—and their descendants. and humanity was to lead it progressively in that development. and love: created in the divine image. and the environment with little thought for its development and more for our advantage (in power. In so doing.13 Through subsequent human history. or possessions). service. Seeking the most of our brief life. This task would not be completed in only a few days or years: the God who had made all things also created time. we have been attracted by what serves our fleeting temporal existence. Maximos Confessor10—urges that the “ultimate good” for creation is its God-given dynamism. the second person of the Trinity. but the divine one. loving.16 God’s Son. In dependence on and faithful communion with God. as one of their descendants. rather than drawing near to the One for whose fellowship we were created but whose eternal existence is beyond our comprehension. influence. we have misused the rest of creation for our own benefit—in government. they tried to become like God by eating the forbidden fruit. they were to acquire the divine likeness as they served and communed with God.14 The garden has become a desert.12 In so doing. Dependent on him—as was all of the rest of creation—humanity was to deepen its commitment to him in lives of joy. in which everything is always in process of change and development. Adam and Eve.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 185 lowing the teaching of St. God promised our fallen first parents that he would send. human beings would themselves develop. bringing out all its latent possibilities.15 Eventually. intending it to unfold into the sweep of subsequent history. society. becoming more deeply committed to their God and increasingly aware of his greatness and his love toward his creation. a champion who would overcome evil. he fulfilled that promise and sent not only a human son. and we have filled our mouths with sand. . all to the glory of the Creator. sought a short-cut to that likeness: heeding the suggestion of the tempter.11 But our first parents. and took their descendants with them. Basil the Great and St. they looked to the creation rather than to the Creator for what they needed. they fell into death. and stewardly manner with everything else in creation. down through history—were to work in a gentle.

though: it offered hope for all of creation. on this earth. in all they do. death. the divine Son became all that the first man was called to be—faithful to God and devoted to him through all his life.”17 The incarnation was not only a rescue operation for fallen human beings. in taking upon himself the death Adam had brought into the world.18 All this Orthodoxy celebrates in the gathering of the church. its liturgy. Much more could be said in sketching out the riches of an Orthodox worldview. We are called anew to the task given our first parents: we are to give ourselves freely and fully to work in and develop all of creation—a creation now redeemed in Jesus Christ20—to God’s glory. and the Eucharist. If any of this strikes you as new. in order to break its power over others. God—who alone has life in himself—broke the stranglehold of death on humanity. in this life and on this earth. The opportunities of serving him in this life are as unlimited as the vastness of creation and its manifold potential. But. he overcame humanity’s enemies—sin. John Chrysostom long ago spoke about this as “the liturgy after the liturgy. in coming as fully human. and “the Word became flesh.” In Jesus Christ human beings are freed and enabled. but I trust that what we have considered is sufficient to indicate its broad contours. since I have not found these matters discussed anywhere in the Orthodox literature available to me. Alexander Schmemann urges. In uniting humanity and deity. to live up to humanity’s original calling—every day. N° 9 took humanity unto himself in the incarnation. Orthodox worship rightly understood impels the faithful to vigorous Christian action in the world. Perhaps you who are Orthodox already recognize all I will say. I can only beg your indulgence. as the Orthodox liturgist Fr. if so.19 St. in his resurrection. and the devil—to free us to live unto God in the present life. I claim no originality for it: I am only trying to think with . since in the incarnation God established a bridge between himself as Creator and his creation. Let me now briefly suggest three implications of this worldview for life in the 21st century. The resurrected Christ summons us to enter into the fullness of our humanity in this life. Christ yielded to what had no power over him.186 Teoloãki åasopis.

economics. as we learn (whether in school or by experience). government. and in all places. music. The privilege of serving the resurrected Christ is not restricted to priests and monks: human beings can serve him in all legitimate occupations. All comes from him. art. we will be working with the still rich potential God built into the “all things visible and invisible” which he created. consequently. We examine what we now know of that creation and seek ways to develop both our knowledge and that creation further. but engaging in the work of ongoing explorations and reflections which will enhance what we may learn about the cosmos. There is nothing—no realm of scholarship.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 187 you through the implications of your worldview for life in the present day. technology. no section of life. God’s creation and his calling on our lives encourage us to engage in such exploration. the sciences. Even so. he remains ever transcendent. Whatever advances we or others may achieve in any field of endeavor—in culture. In all our labors and learning. consequently. we must honor both God’s essence and his energies. . science. we are always encountering the divine energies: keeping him in mind is. His dynamic creation has built into it all the possibilities that God intends for it. redeemed and restored in Christ. or whatever—are the exploration and elucidation of what God placed within the creation. medicine. politics. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would embrace the wide diversity of God’s manifold creation. from an Orthodox perspective. In the first place. and he calls his image-bearers to develop that creation to its full potential. an inescapable responsibility in faithfully learning. Responsible life before God implies not only passing on what has already been learned. As we live. He has set us free to resume our human task of developing culture. literature. depends on him—and. business. Secondly. all that can be studied comes from God’s creative activity. sport. Whatever humankind may manage to develop. in every day. Thirdly. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would encourage all the faithful to develop their potential for God’s service as his image-bearers and vice-regents. all to God’s glory. no function of interpersonal society—which is secular. needs to be studied and taught as his.

as medical researchers or politicians. as chemists or homemakers. Human beings now can honor Christ the Creator and Redeemer by becoming fully all he has gifted them to be—as historians or electricians. N° 9 and everything else out of what God had prepared his magnificent creation to become. Thank you. as political scientists or factory workers. from an Orthodox perspective. I pray this will transpire among the Orthodox faithful here in Serbia in the 21st century. as leaders in society or as followers. taking their place in our human task of unfolding the riches of that creation to the praise of its Creator. Thus.188 Teoloãki åasopis. . An Orthodox worldview has the potential to invigorate and stimulate the faithful today to become all God has made them to be. we can honor Christ in all areas of life.

2. Acts 17:28. and without him not one thing came into being that has come into being. and Oratio 45:7. Oratio 38: 11. John of Damascus. This understanding of humanity is presented by St. 1974). St. The essence/energies distinction was common among the ancient Greek fathers: St. St. Alexander Yelchaninov. Gregory the Theologian. 2d ed. Fedotov. 1988). 7. Gregory of Nyssa (De Opificio Hominis. Fr. 5. . St. 4. 1974). 16) and St. and St.8. Gregory of Nyssa. the treatment in John Meyendorff. 6. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality (Fadux: Btichervertriebsansalt. John of Damascus (The Orthodox Faith 2:12) urged this. 1:3. St. Basil the Great. Maximos Confessor. 2:3. New York: St. St.19.. 256. 206-207. during the course of the Hesychast controversy. cf. A Study of Gregory Palamas. Gregory Palamas. Maximos Confessor all made wide use of it. George Lawrence (Crestwood. The Orthodox Faith 2:12. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. trans. Cf the declaration of St. Gregory Palamas had occasion to emphasize it. John the Theologian: “All things came into being through him [the Logos]. and St. as cited in George P. 11-14. In him was life (John l:3-4a). on the basis of Genesis 1:26-27. De variis difficilibus locis. The Triads. 3. see also the somewhat broader treatment in his Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York: Fordham University Press.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 189 NOTES 1.

and over the cattle. St. St. Cyril of Jerusalem. the discussion in John Meyendorff. “We receive mortality from him [Adam]” (Questions and Answers. She took of its fruit and ate. according to our likeness. according to our likeness’” (Genesis 1:26). but likeness was understood to be the goal toward which human beings were to develop. ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. and over all the wild animals of the earth. 10. 43). who was with her.. St.. and he ate" (Genesis 2:16-17. 13. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). N° 9 8. Anastasius of Sinai said. 3:4-6). male and female he created them. Maximos Confessor argued it in Adversus Thallassium. in the image of God he created them. 12. and over the birds of the air.. and fill the earth and subdue it. in the same vein. among the Greek fathers. “And the Lord God commanded the man. and indeed. ‘Be fruitful and multiply.. God blessed them and God said to them. 9. Maximos Confessor agrees with these senti- . image was understood as given in creation.’ So God created humankind in his image. and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth. “Then God said. and she also gave some to her husband. but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. 60. “But the serpent said to the woman. and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth’” (Genesis 1:26-28). “God saw everything that he had made.. cf. 132-134.. 2 above). ‘You will not die: for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God’”. Ch. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. According to St. for in the day that you eat of it you shall die’”.190 Teoloãki åasopis. Homily 5. Basil the Great taught this in his Hexaemeron. “The first man brought in universal death” (Catechesis 13:2). “Then God said. 11. and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea. Byzantine Theology (as in n.

18. as do virtually all the Greek fathers. Fr. New York: St. 16. and you will strike his heel” (Genesis 3:15). 113. Theophylact of Ohrid. 1989). St. 96-107. specifically citing St. As well. and virtually all the ancient Greek fathers on the accomplishment of redemption by the incarnate Son of God. 7 above). he repeatedly urges that Orthodox worship should drive the faithful out into the world to engage in service (e. and between your offspring and hers. Gregory Palamas (144-145). cf. New Jersey: St. St. born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4). Gregory the Theologian. 134). Vladimir’s Seminary Press. God sent his Son. The above summarizes the views of St. In response to what had transpired. Theodore of Mopsuestia. 17.. Cyril of Alexandria.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 191 ments (cf. “I will put enmity between you [the serpent]and the woman. John 1:14. Maximos Confessor. St. Irenaeus. he will strike your head. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 19. his Byzantium and the Rise of Russia: A Study of Byzantino-Russian Relations in the Fourteenth Century (Crestwood.g. 14. John Chrysostom. and St. Schmemann frequently deals with worldview issues as he treats Orthodox worship and sacraments in his For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy (Crestwood. 1973). 100. John Meyendorff has argued that nothing in Orthodoxy. his Quaestiones ad Thalassium). Paul wrote that “When the fullness of time had come. God declared. would lead to neglect of contemporary issues and problems: cf. Theodoret of Cyprus. 15. John Meyendorff summarizes the consensus of the ancient Greek fathers and subsequent Byzantine Orthodox leaders on these points. in this work. his argument at 21. 123. St. In his Byzantine Theology (as in n. rightly understood. .

in confirmation of this. Lossky cites the statement by St. which extends across the entire cosmos” (114). . “Redemption is a wondrous reality. Vladimir Lossky urges.192 Teoloãki åasopis. Gregory the Theologian. 1978). “A few drops of blood make the universe whole again” (patristic source not given). Vladimir’s Seminary Press. N° 9 In his Orthodox Theology: An Introduction (Crestwood. New Jersey: St.

ecclesiological and missiological) background .which.” recommended by Charles Van Engen.in the light of both its immediate and broad biblical context and its multifaceted (historical. By the linking word 1 See Van Engen 1998. since Acts 15:1 is a typical introductory sentence . geographical. Acts 15:35 is the typical summary statement .that followed the Acts 14:28. Definition of the Passage The Acts 15:22-29 passage is the integral part of . Likewise. cultural.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dimitrije Popadiñ 193 UDK 22. the typical summary statement. 10.what I would entitled . 1 1.the Jerusalem Council event: Acts 15:1-35. by which Luke has ended his report of the First Missionary Journey.to interpret the text (with respect to the selected prominent commentaries) and to understand areas and principles of its implications.by which Luke has wrapped it up the positive outcome of the decision of the Jerusalem Council that is followed by Acts 15:36. This is obvious. in this case.08 Twelve Steps In The Exegesis Of The Acts 15:22-29 The exegetical method utilized in this study is the “Twelve Steps in the Exegesis of a Paragraph. The Acts 15:22-29 passage immediately follows the concluding speech of James (15:13-21). is opening up a new topic (controversial question related to circumcision that ruined Jewish/Gentile Christian relationship) . theological. . the introductory sentence of the Second Missionary Journey. The purpose of the exegesis of Acts 15:22-29 is to listen the text itself .

Within the Acts. which is the preparation for mission. which is. as a whole. which could be seen as the preparation for the Second Coming of Christ). but it is a passage with its own identity: it carries the contents of the conclusion of the Jerusalem Council.work. the preparation for His dead and resurrection. Within the gospel of Luke.since it is part of Luke’s one -though two volumes . Thus. N° 9 “Then” (22) the writer begin to presents the corporate decision of the Council and the action taken by it (“chose… wrote a letter and sent…” 22. could be considered as a preparation for Acts (and the Acts as the preparation for the mission of the Church. the Acts 15: is the preparation for the new level of the cross cultural mission both in terms of the more explicit definition of the content of the message (the gospel is “free” from “burdens” of the Jewish culture). which is the preparation for His ascension.” (29). again. 2.both. and in terms of the grater potential to geographically spread away from the center (Jerusalem). as the geographical place (verse 30 follows the events in Antioch) and as the event (the meeting of the apostles and the church) by citing the letter-conclusion of the Council.versus Acts alone . 23) and by the other “border-passage-verse. Textual Variation The most significant textual variation of the Acts 15:22-29 passage has to do with the phrase: kai tou pniktou (“and what is stran- . 3. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Luke/Acts Acts 15:22-29 passage has to be considered in its relationship with Luke/Acts . the writer is “leaving” the Jerusalem Council . Gospel of Luke. Accordingly. the prologue is the preparation for the teaching and the ministry of Jesus. the prologue is the preparation for the coming of the Spirit. I can recognize this passage (with its immediate context.194 Teoloãki åasopis. Acts 15:22-29 is the sequence of the Acts 15:1-35. Acts 15:1-35) as the preparation for the new level of the cross-cultural mission. In this perspective.

However. things sacrificed to idols. and 4. for example.stands in contrast with the Egyptian or Alexandrian text found in the Codex Vaticanus (B). 2 4. we see Paul affirming Timothy’s circumcision. (also confirmed by Irenaeus in the second. and its four -prohibitions (1. which has been omitted in Western text of the Codex Bezae (D) and the Harclean Syriac (apparatus). 11. particularly 17:10. . 2. they “might then have to choose withdrawal into isolation or ‘apostasy from Moses. This three-prohibitions ( 1. he (as well as James in that regard) has considered being a “yoke” (10). a special warning regarding the restriction of eating any manner of blood have needed to be enclosed with the final decision of the Jerusalem Council. things sacrificed to idols. fornication) Apostolic Decree that is understood by its authorities as a ceremonial in nature. blood and 3. 191.understood by the Western authorities as ethical in nature . fornication) Apostolic Decree .’” This concern is build in the Jerusalem Decree (proposed by James. since it takes into the consideration Jewish feelings about the outward behavior of the 3 2 3 See Smith 1919. Even though the Jerusalem Council has made clear that the circumcision is not required for salvation (and Paul’s writing emphases the primacy of the circumcision of the hearth). 3.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 195 gled”). 2. Tannehill 1998. the controversial demand for the circumcision lied upon the Gentles. a Jew). things strangled. Thus. apparently contradictory act. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Related Scriptures Simon Peter has learned a significant lessons (Lk 15:11-32 and Acts 10:1-48) which have undermined his ethnocentrism and help him to understand the non-legalistic nature of God’s message of salvation. most probably because of the strict language of the Leviticus 17 and 18. blood. and Tertullian in the early third century). is Paul’s compassion for the concern of the Jewish Christians that “as Gentiles become the majority within the church”. Robert Tannehill explains that the reason for such.

and thus it is determined by them. Literal Features of the Acts 15:22-29 The words. (Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem. N° 9 growing community of Gentles. I am impressed by the careful construction of the letter. where His apostles are the ministers and from where the gospel was spread all over. the Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features and. verse 4.but they should only “abstain from sacrifices offered to idols and from blood and from animals strangled and from fornication:” (verse 29). “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit. The decision is an authoritative one since it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. 255. and the whole congregation was present.) 6. by which Luke is wrapping up the decision of the Council. In short. verse 7.” 4 5 7. Geographical and Historical Setting The Jerusalem Council took place in the Church in Jerusalem. The Major Theme of Acts 15:22-29 The Church in Jerusalem has made an authoritative decision that the Gentiles. I will not discuss this issue. Marshall 1983. are not under the submission to the Jewish law . and to us” (verse 28). versus 12 and 22). Furthermore. apostles and elders assembled for the meeting. which are now consisting the Church. (Given place.” and there is no parallel for such a phrase. .especially to the rite of circumcision . “emphasize the church’s role as the vehicle of the Spirit. wherever the Church have had its regular meetings. thus. The time of the Jerusalem Council falls in between the First and the Second Missionary Journeys. regarding which “some critics claim that it is a literary composition by Luke himself. and it is made by the “original” church established by Christ. 315. you don’t have to circumsize.196 Teoloãki åasopis. by accepting the Gospel of Grace. 5. 4 5 Bruce 1983.

There are two categories of the people: the senders of the letter. • We are confirming Paul and Barnabas (25. • The only exceptions has to do with the idols.including Judah (who is called Barsabas) and Silas. by a council. apostles. nd rd 10.and the whole [Jerusalem] church. ecclesiological and missiological contribution of the passage are obvious. blood and fornication (29). in particular. elders . Ecclesiological. “who were leaders among the brethren” . elders and the congregation and the way of solving the church’s controversies e. • We are sending you our elders. in that discloses organization of the early Church in terms of the role of the apostles. to confirmed that. Pneumatological. The People Involved in Acts 15:22-29 All of the people mentioned in this passage are listed in the 22 and the 23 verse. “to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. and the recipients.” (verse 23). together with the Paul and Barnabas (verse 22). in that reveals the direct involvement of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s leadership and the decision making in general and. 9. • In that.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 197 8. Missiological contribution of this passage is that clarifies the church’s understanding of the cross-cultural characteristic of the Gospel (because it is supra-cul- . 26) [and their opinion]. we are in agreement with the Holy Spirit (28). one which relates to the expansion of the Christian faith cross-culturally.g. The Main Theological Concept of Acts 15:22-29 The pneumatological. Judah and Silas (27). The “Outline” of the Theme of Acts 15:22-29 I see the “outline” of the support of the main theme of Acts 15:22-29 as following: • The Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features • The Jews that “upset your souls” (24) were not our representatives.

The church in Jerusalem was well-organized. to know how to act when faced with the controversy. “The decision of the Council is put down in writing. Without an active participation (or. Verse 23.” 6 7 6 7 Kurnizgen 1966. 34.g.it will be a blessing toward salvation to the recipients of the Gospel. If authentic . 253. it will be a yoke that troubles peoples’ souls more then it helps. This is important. Harrison 1986. 11.e.” Verse 24. Furthermore. The Church is a properly ordered community. the nature of the church would determine the nature of its mission. submitted to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. the church would lose its God-given identity of being people of God. They acted decisively and they made a specific decisions regarding both what they decided about the controversy and how they would convey their decision. Implications Accordingly. ecclesiological and missiological implications. task-oriented and delegating church. . and it will consequently become a humane institution. the Council “carefully dissociated the Jerusalem church from those of their number who had made the demand contained in 15:1. 12. since there was no authorization. Conclusions in the Light of the Prominent Commentaries Verse 22.198 Teoloãki åasopis. Holy Spirit lead and inspired . If institutionalized. an organization that uses the means and methods of human secular societies. Acts 15:22-29 has theological. better: leadership) of the Holy Spirit. Gathered for the sake of Christ. This passage is a lighthouse to a church at any time and any place. In its letter. N° 9 tural in nature) and enables it to carry out the Great Commission with authenticity. with an open-minded discussion of all participants. a church would create a platform for a fulfillment of God’s will.

251. Josef 1966 The Acts of the Apostles. 20). New York: Herder and Herder.” “Verse 29 lists the four provisions of the apostolic decree just as originally proposed by James (v. The leaders (apostles and elders) and the assembly (whole Jerusalem church) “are included in the pronoun us. but also confirm by word of mouth what it contained. Grand Rapids: William B. 1986 Interpreting Acts: The Expanding Church. Gerhard A. The Council “made it abundantly clear that the men they had now agreed to choose…and send… did have their full approval and support. 288. Vol.” 8 9 10 REFERENCES CITED Bruce. Harisson. while the Holy Spirit functions as the chief authority to which the church and its leaders give their agreement. They would not only deliver the letter. 335.Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1983 Commentary on the Book of the Acts. 1.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 199 Verse 25 . Polhill 1992. 1986 Acts: Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Everett F. F.” Verse 28. Krodel.27. . Grand Rapids: Academie Books Zondervan Publishing House. Kurnizgen. 8 9 10 Stott 1990. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House. Krodel 1986.

Van Engen. John R. Fuller Theological Seminary. Tannehill. Smith. England: Inter-Varsity Press and Grand Rapids: William B. 1990 The Spirit the Church and the World: The Message of Acts. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Paul.” MT 523 Course Description and Syllabus. N° 9 Marshall. I. 1992 The New American Commentary: Acts. Charles 1998 “The Holy Spirit and Mission in Luke/Acts. Neshville: Broadman Press. Robert 1998 The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts A Literary Interpretation. John B. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. Howard 1983 The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary. . New York: Doran. W.200 Teoloãki åasopis. Polhill. Leicester. Mineapolis: Fortress Press. Stott. David 1919 The Life and Letters of St. Vol 2.

eklesioloãke i misioloãke) pozadine.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 201 Rezime U ovom ålanku autor predstavlja dvanaest koraka procesa egzegeze svetopisamskog teksta opisa Jerusalimskog sabora (Dela 15:22-29). tumaåenje teksta s osvrtom na odabrane priznate komentare. geografske. kulturne. teoloãke. Svrha egzegeze ovoga odlomka jeste „sluãanje“ samoga teksta. i to prema uputima profesora Åarlsa Van Engena. . i to u svom uæem i ãirem biblijskom kontekstu i u svetlu njegove viãeslojne (istorijske. i identifikovanje i razumevanje odreœenih oblasti i principa primene ovoga teksta.

202 STRUÅNI RAD .

patnja ili kazna snalazi. da li je moæda ta bolest samo rezultat ljudske nemarnosti za oåuvanjem sopstvenog zdravlja? Verujem da mnogi hriãñani. Petar Piliñ UDK 234. Prihvañeno: 01. zaãto dolazi do bolesti. Meœutim. Oni su smatrali da je u pitanju bio greh. U ovom radu bih hteo prvo da kaæem neãto o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja.net ) Duhovni aspekti bolesti Biblijska perspektiva Rezime Pre oko dve hiljade godina Isus je prolazio sa svojim uåenicima pored jednog slepca. danas. koji je bio slep od roœenja. teol. ljudi se i danas pitaju zaãto ih takav bol. Isusovi uåenici su znatiæeljno postavili svom uåitelju jedno vaæno pitanje: “ravi. kada govorim o duhovnim aspektima bolesti æelim naglaãenije govoriti o postavci Isusa i njegovih . pitanja mogu biti postavljena na sledeñi naåin: da li je neko ljudsko biñe bolesno zbog posledice greha? Da li je to ljudsko biñe moæda bolesno zato ãto ga je Sotona hteo iskuãati kao Jova? Ili.predavaå za predmete Primljeno: 22. Zato su i postavili takvo pitanje.2010 Hriãñanska etika i duãebriæniãtvo Pregledni ålanak Protestantski Teoloãki Fakultet u Novom Sadu Pastor Hriãñanske Baptistiåke Crkve u Novom Sadu ( pilicnip@nspoint.02. ili njegovi roditelji pa se slep rodio?” (Jovan 9:1-3).23:616 Asistent . æele odgovor na ovo pitanje kao i Hristovi uåenici u ono vreme. Neki pokuãavaju da shvate smisao bolesti.03. Meœutim. a i mnogi drugi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 203 Dipl.2010 Svetske religije. Kada su u pitanju uzroci bolesti. on. ko je zgreãio.

na prvom mestu o bolestima. i kako bi trebali i danas. N° 9 uåenika prema bolestima. Saznavãi za Saru. 1. Smatram da u Njegovim i njihovim postavkama leæi smisao. Bog je rekao svom narodu: “Ako dobro uzasluãaã glas Gospoda Boga svojega. bolest. Åovek je u Boæijim rukama i niko i niãta ne moæe izbaviti åoveka iz njegovih ruku jer je Bog åovekov Stvoritelj. nakon ãto su se pokajali.dogaœaj koji govori o Boæijoj kazni za Avimeleka i njegovom pomilovanju. æelim da vidim kako se Isus postavljao u takvim sluåajevima. greh. jer sam ja Gospod. Bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja Bog je onaj koji daje zdravlje åoveku. u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. U knjizi Izlazak u petnaestom poglavlju u dvadesetãestom stihu. ali takoœe i puãta bolest na åoveka (Pnz. Bolesni ljudi su morali da se pokaju i da mole Boga za oproãtenje da bi ozdravili. reãenje i uteha u pogledu ljudskih bolesti kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Uåitelj i Gospod.204 Teoloãki åasopis. nijedne bolesti koju sam pustio na Misir neñu pustiti na tebe. U Starom zavetu. demoni. Avram je govorio za svoju æenu Saru da mu je sestra. Da bismo imali ãto jasniju sliku o bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja potrebno je analizirati nekoliko starozavetnih tekstova koji govore o takvim dogaœajima. Isus Hristos. zato ãto je On moj Spasitelj. Postanak 20 . Neki od njih. i ako prigneã uho k zapovijestima njegovijem i uãåuvaã sve uredbe njegove. Bolest je u Starom zavetu bila Boæija kazna za neposluãnost. Zato. i uåiniã ãto je pravo u oåima njegovijem. isceljenje. Pronaãao sam åetiri teksta koja ñu koristiti za ovu analizu. apostoli. 32:39). Bog se brinuo za zdravlje svog naroda ali narod je trebao da mu bude posluãan. ponovo zdravi. Avimelek je poslao svoje sluge . Bog je dao åoveku jedan uslov koji ñe mu sigurno obezbediti zdravlje. Pokajanje je bilo put ka ozdravljenju. Novi zavet. lekar tvoj”. Kljuåne reåi: Stari zavet. Zatim. æelim da vidim i kako su se Njegovi uåenici postavljali u sliånim situacijama. pogotovo za pripadnike izabranog naroda.su bili isceljeni.

Bog je rekao Avimeleku u snu da je uåinio zlo jer je uzeo æenu koja ima muæa. 2. U Starom zavetu je vaæilo pravilo: ko zgreãi biñe kaænjen. Arona i Mojsija da doœu u ãator od sastanka. Brojevi 12 . Boæiji åovek. kao kaznu za greh davao bolest koja je vodila u smrt. bolest je i u ovom sluåaju bila kazna za greh. i da ñe zbog toga Avimelek poginuti. u starozavetno doba. Meœutim. Zbog Avramovog kukaviåluka. a zatim da se za njega pomoli Boæiji åovek ili prorok. vratio je Saru Avramu i joã mu je dao mnoge darove.govori o Boæijoj kazni za Mariju koja je gunœala protiv Mojsija kao Boæijeg proroka. videlo se da se njegov gnev spustio na Mariju jer je ona bila gubava. i æivot njegove porodice. Meœutim. i to se i dogodilo. neposluãnost. prvo trebao da se pokaje za uåinjeni greh/grehe. bila je bela kao sneg. Inaåe. Dakle. zato mu je Bog dao uslov. Gospod je pozvao Mariju. Videvãi Mariju. Avimelek je to uåinio iz neznanja. Kada je Bog otiãao iz ãatora od sastanka. a zatim je Mariji i Aronu rekao da su uåinili greh gunœajuñi protiv Mojsija kao njegovog proroka sa kojim on razgovara lice u lice. Gospoda Boga je ovo gunœanje naljutilo. Aron se pokajao i zamolio Mojsija da moli Boga za Marijino isceljenje. Avram se pomolio da Bog isceli Avimeleka i ceo njegov dom. koji. Mojsije.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 205 da mu je dovedu za æenu. u ovom primeru Bog se smilovao na Avimeleka i dao mu uslov od åijeg je ispunjenja zavisio njegov. Bog je. Ono ãto je bilo potrebno da bi Marija bila isceljena je . Avimelek je ispunio Boæiji uslov. ko bude posluãan biñe blagosloven. ako izvrãi moæe da ozdravi i ostane æiv. Marija i Aron su gunœali protiv Mojsija jer im se nije svidelo ãto je uzeo æenu Madijanku. da bi åovek ozdravio. Dakle iz ovog primera moæemo videti da je u starozavetno doba. Trebao je da vrati Saru Avramu i da se Avram pomoli za njega jer je Avram prorok. Stari zavet nije baã poznat po milosti. pomolio se za Marijino isceljenje i Bog mu je rekao da ñe ona biti za sedam dana zdrava i da se onda moæe vratiti nazad u narod. Oni su smatrali da Gospod ne govori samo preko Mojsija. Boæiji åovek.

Inaåe. . svi oni koje su ujedale zmije. bez milosti su umirali. Isaija je rekao Jezekiji da uzme grudu suvih smokava i da stavi na mesto na kom je otok i da ñe tako ozdraviti. 3.206 Teoloãki åasopis.govori o Jezekijinoj smrtnoj bolesti i isceljenju te bolesti jer je Bog odluåio da Jezekija poæivi joã petnaest godina. smilovao se Jezekiji. Narod Izraelski se spasao pogledom vere u zmiju koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao. Mojsije je napravio zmiju onakvu kakvu mu je Gospod zapovedio da napravi. Zato je Jezekija u suzama molio Gospoda da mu se smiluje i da mu da da poæivi joã nekoliko godina. Isaija 38:1-5. i zato ãto im se hleb ogadio. Izraelci su se bunili protiv Boga i Mojsija zbog toga ãto su ih izveli iz Misira. i svako ko je verom pogledao u tu zmiju. Kada se Jezekija smrtno razboleo doãao mu je prorok Isaija i preneo mu poruku od Gospoda da ñe umreti. 4. u ovom sluåaju za Mariju. U protivnom. a zatim da to kaæu Boæijem proroku. Mojsije se molio za to i Bog je sklonio zmije i rekao mu naåin na koji ñe ozdraviti oni koje su zmije ujele. i preko proroka Isaije mu poruåio da ñe poæiveti joã petnaest godina. Znaåi. da bi se on pomolio za njih i njihovo ozdravljenje. Meœutim. Boæijeg åoveka. Gospod je to åuo pa je spustio svoj gnev na one koji su gunœali tako da je veliki broj ljudi pomreo od ujeda zmija.govori o tome kako se Bog smilovao na ljude koji su gunœali protiv njega i dao Mojsiju reãenje od bolesti. bio je Bogu veran i celim srcem je åinio ono ãto je bilo Bogu ugodno. Jezekija je to posluãao i ozdravio je. Isus je govorio da ñe i on biti podignut kao i ova zmija i da ñe svako ko poveruje u Njega biti spaãen (Jovan 3:14). bilo je bitno da se oni pokaju za svoj greh. Kada su ostali videli ãta se deãava. bio je ozdravljen. Jezekija je bio veoma poboæan. 21 . Gospod je åuo tu molitvu. N° 9 pokajanje i molitva proroka. Brojevi 21:5-9 . a nisu se pokajali i prihvatili Boæije reãenje za ozdravljenje. Isus je sebe uporedio sa ovom zmijom koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao da bi je svi videli. za bolesnu osobu. pokajali su se ãto su gunœali i doãli su kod Mojsija moleñi ga da moli Gospoda da ukloni zmije od naroda.

53). U Luki 5:17 je zapisano da je Isus leåio silom Gospodnjom. kako je isceljivao bolesne tj. On je imao veliku moñ i ljudi su se zaprepaãñivali jer je åinio pred njima åuda isceljenja i izgonio demone (Lk. On je doãao da oslobodi suænje. Sveto pismo nam indirektno govori da je najznaåajnije videti kako se Isus postavljao prema bolestima. bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja nam daju joã jasniju i bogatiju sliku o uzrocima i razlozima bolesti i naåinima isceljenja bolesnih od strane Isusa Hrista i njegovih uåenika. Isusova sluæba je bila puna takvih dogaœaja. ukoliko su se bolesni pokajali i ukoliko se Boæiji åovek molio za njih. bili ozdravljani. Bog je i u Starom zavetu imao milosti prema greãnima pa je. Smatram da ñemo tada imati jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. Bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja Novi zavet na mnogo mesta govori o bolestima i njihovim isceljenjima. ãta je radio. Uglavnom je bolest bila kazna za greh. videti kako su koristili Isusov autoritet i njegovu moñ da bi iscelili bolesne. drugim reåima. 4:36). 8:46). . znaåajno je videti kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima. da bolesti naãe nosi i nemoñi naãe uzme (Is. Kada je isceljivao. Isus je imao taj autoritet i narod je to primeñivao. kako je koristio svoj autoritet i svoju moñ kada je isceljivao bolesne.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 207 Ovaj dogaœaj je Jezekija zapisao u svojoj knjizi (38:9-20). posledica greha. On je posedovao tu silu i nije imao potrebu da se poziva na neki autoritet. Dakle. ta je sila izlazila iz Njega (Lk. To je i radio. 53:4). Meœutim. Moguñe je da je i u ovom sluåaju greh bio uzrok bolesti. Iako nije jasno reåeno koji je bio uzrok Jezekijine bolesti. ipak bismo mogli pretpostaviti da su u pitanju bili gresi koje je ranije poåinio jer u sedamnaestom stihu Jezekija kaæe da je Gospod “bacio za leœa svoja sve grijehe moje”. Isus i bolesti u evanœelju po Luki Za Isusa Hrista je najavljeno da ñe isceliti mnoge kada bude doãao na ovu zemlju (Is. Mislim da smo analizirajuñi ova åetiri primera dobili jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. Ali. Nadalje.

2 Iako su tu bili prisutni fariseji. Poãto je bila velika guæva. Isus se nagnuo nad njom i zapretio groznici. 1. 5:18-20.3 Moæda neki smatraju da 1 2 3 Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. Autoritativno se izraæavajuñi. Manson smatra da “ono ãto je taj dogaœaj u prvom redu trebao istaknuti jeste upravo åinjenica da Isusov autoritet u podruåju vere poåinje opraãtanjem greha”. 25 – isceljenje uzetoga. Isus se nije osvrtao na njih iako je znao da su oni tu da bi ga uhvatili u pogreãci. Isus je rekao ono ãto je moralo da se uradi. a ne o bolesti. odnosno da su svi bolesni kaænjeni jer su poåili mnogo greha. imala je groznicu. N° 9 U nastavku ñu navesti trinaest neposrednih Isusovih izleåenja bolesnih. njegovi prijatelji su trebali imati veliku veru u Isusa da bi raskopali krov od kuñe i spustili bolesnika pred Isusa. a tri ñu detaljnije analizirati. 989. sve ñu ih ukratko prokomentarisati. Ovom bolesniku su bili potrebni ljudi koji bi ga nosili ako bi trebao negde da ode. opraãtaju ti se gresi. On to nije namerno uradio da bi se prepirao sa farisejima. Petrova taãta je ustala zdrava i posluæivala ih je. 23. jer je to bilo reãenje.208 Teoloãki åasopis. Kod ovog bolesnika uzrok bolesti je na prvom mestu bio greh. Isusa je zadivila vera njegovih prijatelja. Isus je doãao u Petrovu kuñu. . 115. U ovoj situaciji su mu naroåito trebali ljudi koji bi ga odneli do Isusa. 4:38. Moris: 1983: str. Isus je rekao: åoveåe. 24. 39 – isceljenje Petrove taãte. Isus je video njihovu veru i ozdravio åoveka. 2. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. veñ je to uradio da bi paralisani åovek mogao da bude isceljen. Isusove prve reåi u ovom dogaœaju govore o grehu. trebalo je prvo oprostiti grehe.1 Reåi nisu bile izgovorene ali je sam åin bio nema molba. Petrova taãta je bila bolesna. ali to ne implicira da je greh uzrok svaåije bolesti.

3.4 Luka se usredsreœuje na samo isceljenje. Odeljak Lk. Ona je doæivljavala mnoge neugodnosti jer su je smatrali neåistom zbog krvarenja (Lev. Ova æena je iãla kod 4 Vidi: Moris: 1983: str. kao ãto to evanœelista Marko kaæe. ali mu je. poruåio da on nije dostojan da Isus uœe u njegovu kuñu niti da on sam doœe pred njega. 13:1-5). na koje nije bilo odgovora. 7:1-10 – isceljenje kapetanovog sluge. Nakon jednog Isusovog pitanja. 6. Susana i mnoge druge koje ne spominju Evanœelja. pozvao je åoveka sa bolesnom rukom da stane na sredinu sinagoge. pozvao Isusa da to uåini. Kapetan je poruåio da je dovoljna samo jedn Isusova reå i njegov ñe sluga biti zdrav. Zbog toga ãto je znao misli fariseja i knjiæevnika. 8:43-48 – isceljenje krvotoåive æene. Ovo ne znaåi da ljudi ne trebaju iñi kod lekara. Isus je bio zadivljen kapetanovom verom. Kapetan rimske vojske je. 6:6-10 – isceljenje åoveka sa suvom rukom. ujedno.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 209 greh obavezno donosi neku bolest. Nekada bolesnici idu kod lekara i potroãe svoje imanje da bi bili izleåeni ali ne vredi. verujuñi da Isus moæe isceliti njegovog slugu. Mislim da je to moguñe ali to ne mora da bude pravilo (Vidi Lk. Ovaj tekst govori o Isusovim sledbenicama koje je Isus izleåio od zlih duhova i bolesti. Ljudima ne preostaje niãta drugo nego da pogledom vere gledaju na Onog koji je Lekar nad lekarima. Dok je Isus jedne subote uåio u sinagogi zapazio je åoveka sa suvom desnom rukom. 160. . 8:2-3 – Isus je isceljivao i nespomenute u Evanœeljima. 15:25). Meœu njima su bile Marija Magdalena. na Isusa. da se ona mnogo namuåila dok se leåila kod lekara jer je to za Luku koji je i sam bio lekar bilo sasvim normalno da je ta æena tako prolazila. Isus je reåju iscelio suvu ruku tom åoveku rekavãi: “pruæi svoju ruku”. Luka nam ovde ne kaæe. Jovana. 8:43-48 nam govori o isceljenju krvotoåive æene. Tako je i bilo. 5. 4.

13:10-13 – isceljena æena koja je 18 godina pogrbljena je moj treñi detaljniji primer koji koristim u ovoj analizi. U ovom stihu se govori o joã jednom primeru Isusove sile i autoriteta. Isus je isterao demona iz nemog åoveka i åovek je progovorio. vera tvoja spasla te je. N° 9 lekara ali nije vredelo. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. Deåak je imao padavicu jer ga je neåisti duh bacao na zemlju. Isus je isterao neåistog duha i na taj naåin izleåio deåaka. Ova æena koja nije mogla. vera joj je pomogla i bila je isceljena. . Nije hteo da to ostane samo izmeœu njih. Sotona ju 5 6 7 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. 995. posle svih neuspeha ona je doãla do Isusa. stareãina sinagoge nije mogao da vidi dalje od propisane norme i da u ozdravljenju zgråene æene ugleda Isusovu samilost. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. veñ da je njena vera u Njega ta koja ju je iscelila. idi s mirom”. a bavljenje takvim poslom na ãabat je bilo zabranjeno. Religiozne voœe su smatrale da je isceljenje lekarski posao. zbog zakona (Lev. Æeleo je da se ova æena predstavi i da joj da na znanje da njegova odeña nema nikakvo magiåno dejstvo. priñi Isusu otvoreno.6 7. Ona je bila Avramova kñer ali je njena bolest bila zla. 11:14 – izgoni demona i nemi progovara. Zato.7 Niãta ne upuñuje na pretpostavku da je ta æena verovala u Isusa. priãla mu je u veri æeleñi tajno da se dotakne Njega i bude isceljena. 52. 15:27). Ovaj dogaœaj je narod zadivio a zavidne posmatraåe odveo u drugi ekstrem. “kñeri.210 Teoloãki åasopis. 9:38-42 – isceljenje mladiña koji ima padavicu. 8. 35. Dok su deåaka dovodili Isusu demon je bacio deåaka na zemlju i poåeo da ga trza. isti sluåaj moæe biti sa nekima od nas. 9.5 Naravno. Isus je æeleo da ta æena da svedoåanstvo pred svima. Isus je silazio sa gore preobraæenja i naiãao na åoveka koji ga je zamolio da mu isceli sina. Dakle.

poloæio je svoje ruke na nju i ona se odmah ispravila. Isus se smilovao nad njim i reåju ga izleåio. slepac je zatraæio da Isus uåini da on progleda.9 10. Isus uglavnom nije polagao ruke na bolesnike. 17:12-14 – isceljenje deset gubavaca. U ovih trinaest primera mogli smo videti Isusa i Njegovu postavku prema duhovnim aspektima bolesti. Moris: 1983: str. povikao iz sveg glasa da se Isus smiluje nad njim. uzroånika bolesti. “Moæda Luka æeli reñi da je u tom trenutku ona veñ od tog duha (11) bila osloboœena (12). Isusa je srelo deset gubavaca koji su izdaleka podigli glas molbe da se on smiluje na njih. Petar je napao prvosveãtenikovog slugu i odsekao mu je desno uvo. komentariãuñi da ga je spasla njegova vera. U toj kuñi je bio åovek koji je patio od vodene bolesti. Prilikom isterivanja demona. Mislim da su ovi primeri dovoljno pouåni da bismo ovo shvatili: Isus je Lekar nad 8 9 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Kada su ga doveli do Isusa. 51 – isceljenje uva prvosveãtenikovog sluge. 1003. Isus im je dao reå da ñe biti oåiãñeni na putu do sveãtenika kojima su trebali da se pokaæu. i dotaknuo njegovo uvo. 22:50. Na putu izmeœu Samarije i Galileje. Jedan od njih je video da je izleåen. åuvãi da Isus prolazi. Isus se smilovao na slugu. 14:1-4 – isceljenje åoveka koji ima vodenu bolest. . Isus je jedne subote bio gost u kuñi farisejskog stareãine. te da je Isus samo dovrãio isceljenje”. Iscelio je slugino uvo bez da ga je sluga to zamolilo. 18:35-43 – isceljenje jerihonskog slepca. Kada su prvosveãtenikove sluge doãle po Isusa da bi ga priveli. 12. videvãi ãta se deãava. 13. slavio je Boga i vratio se da zahvali Isusu. Isus ga je izleåio dohvatom nakon neodgovorenog pitanja: “da li se sme subotom leåiti?” 11. Ova bolest je bila prouzrokovana demonom koji ju je dræao zgråenom. 229.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 211 je svezao. Na putu za Jerihon Isus je prolazio pored jednog slepca. priãao mu.8 Isus je æenu proglasio isceljenom. Slepac je.

ovde se æelim osvrnuti na ãest dogaœaja apostolskih izleåenja bolesnih opisanih u ovoj knjizi. u Isusovo ime. nekada izgoni demone i isceljuje. i ãto god zaiãtete u moje ime. Takoœe. Kada je prizvano Isusovo ime da isceli bolest. Isus je dao autoritet svojim uåenicima da u Njegovo ime åine joã veña åuda od onih koja je i On sam åinio dok je æiveo na zemlji (Lk. Isus je otiãao Ocu i od onda pa do danas Hristovi sledbenici. Jvn. jer ja idem k Ocu. mogu zatraæiti od Oca. i veña od ovih. Najverodostojnije i najjaåe dokaze o ovoj Isusovoj izjavi moæemo nañi u knjizi Dela apostolskih. u svim ovim primerima vidimo da je potrebna vera u Isusa Hrista. N° 9 lekarima. naglasak je moj). Apostol Petar i Jovan glavne su liånosti ovog dogaœaja. Zato. Nekada samo isceljuje. Stoga. Apostoli i bolesti U ovom delu rada bih hteo da kaæem neãto o tome kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima i ãta su åinili po pitanju toga jer Isus je rekao uåenicima: “Zaista. starosti ili nemoñi tela. Petrovo “pogledaj u nas” pojaåava napetost. åetiri ñu analizirati a dva ñu samo prokomentarisati: 1. kada govorimo o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja ne smemo izostaviti apostole (uåenike Hristove) i njihove postavke prema bolestima.212 Teoloãki åasopis. Meœutim. 10:17-19. Ovo je velika istina. . nekada opraãta grehe pa isceljuje. to ñu uåiniti. 3:1-16 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja. verovati u Njegovu moñ isceljivanja. Ako me ãto zamolite u moje ime. a Luka tako uokviravajuñi ozdravljenje uspeva izazvati najsnaæniji utisak kod åitatelja. da se proslavi Otac u Sinu. iako je u njemu Isus Nazareñanin ipak najvaæniji uåesnik. verujuñi u Njegovo ime. da se dogode i åuda. 14:12-14). zaista. ja ñu uåiniti” (Jovan 14:12-14. treba da verujemo da Isus oåekuje da mi idemo kod lekara koji ñe nas izleåiti od bolesti koje nisu izazvane od strane neåistih sila veñ zbog naãe nemarnosti oko oåuvanja zdravlja. kaæem vam. ko veruje u mene åiniñe dela koja ja åinim.

Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. sila Boæija se kroz njih pokazivala u mnogim znacima i åudima. 15. Petar je dao do znanja. 11. Isusa Hrista”12 Odgovor koji je dao apostol Petar u Delima 4:8-10 je jednak odgovoru koji je dao u Delima 4:16. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. 2. Carson: 1994: str. Njegovo ime koje ne samo ãto opraãta (Dela 2:38). ko mu je dao autoritet i moñ da isceljuje. veñ silom Duha Svetog.13 Ljudi koji bi proãli pored Petrove senke ili ako je ona padala na bolesnike.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 213 onda je moñno Isusovo ime poåelo delovati. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. Åuda ãto su ovde navedena nadilaze ona kojima su nas do sad obavestila Dela apostolska. ili autoritet.11 “Hriãñani imaju neãto mnogo bolje ãto mogu da podele. ovde vidimo da se ispunila molitva apostola iz Dela 4:29-30. Apostoli nisu isceljivali svojom sopstvenom silom. 1073. To je upravo ono ãto je Petar imao ( i dao) . propovedala reå. 75. Koristeñi Isusovo ime. 5:12-16 – Isus je kroz apostole leåio bolesnike. …”i vera – do koje dolazimo njegovim posredstvom – dala mu je potpuno zdravlje pred svima vama”.posveñenje koje dolazi kroz veru u ime. nego i ozdravlja. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str.14 Zapravo. 54. U ovom odeljku se govori o mnogim åudima koja su se zbivala preko apostolskih ruku. Ovde se priseñamo masovnih ozdravljenja koja je Isus pre åinio. Ova åuda su oåitovala silu Mesije koji je bio razapet i vaskrsnut iz mrtvih i koji je i u ovakvim trenucima bio sa uåenicima. 1075. i to ne Petrovom senkom. Dogaœala su se åuda. 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 . veñ Boæijom silom koja je delovala kroz Petra.10 “U ime Isusa iz Nazareta” znaåi “autoritetom Isusa Hrista”.15 10 10 11 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. stekli su poãtovanje. bili su isceljeni. i reåima i delom.

Jvn. ova åuda su se odigrala u mestu u kojem je bilo mnogo crne magije i okultizma. 17 . Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. veñ nas u ovom sluåaju pomalo iznenaœuje Lukin izveãtaj o naåinu isceljenja koji ne nalazimo ni u evanœeljima. 2:22 i 10:38). Sa nekog rastojanja mu je snaænim glasom rekao da ustane. Meœutim. 5. Jedan uåenik po imenu Ananija.16 Drugo. 14:8-10 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja kroz Pavla. i veña od ovih…”). 19:11.214 Teoloãki åasopis. kod åuda koja je Isus åinio17 (“. 14:3). 9:6. 9:8-18 – Pavle je progledao nakon nekog vremena. samo je Bog sada åinio åuda kroz Pavla. baã kao i ovde.7. 4. Kada se apostol Pavle prvi put sreo sa vaskrslim Hristom na putu za Damask privremeno je ostao slep.. o upotrebi nekog predmeta i dodira (Lk. Brojna åuda u Novom zavetu su zavisila. 16 16 17 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. 4:40. 6:19. Ljudi su pokuãavali uz pomoñ nekih magijskih formula da pokuãaju da åine åuda. U takvom mestu je Bog pokazao svoju silu kroz Pavla åinivãi neobiåna åuda. 12 – Bog åini velika isceljenja i åuda kroz Pavla. nas ne treba da iznenadi to da Bog moæe da isceljuje. Luka je ovo zapisao namerno jer je smatrao da ova åuda nisu “obiåna”.dela koja ja åinim. 221. 5:12. Ove reåi sadræe opis nesvakidaãnjih hriãñanskih åudesa. 22:51. N° 9 3. 5:13. 1096. Dl. 8:54. Ovaj odeljak nam govori o istom sluåaju kao i sa Petrom u 5:12-16. bilo je logiåno da ta odeña nema snagu dok ne dotakne apostolovo telo. Buduñi da je Pavle bio posrednik u izvrãenju Boæijih åuda. dolazi do Pavla nakon nekoliko dana i polaæe ruke na njega da u ime Isusa progleda i ispuni se Duhom. Verovatno je Pavle to uåinio u Isusovo ime da hromi prohoda iako to u tekstu nije jasno spomenuto. 13:13. 15. Åuda su imala znaåajnu ulogu u Isusovom delovanju (Dl. 9:12. Pavle je zapazio hromog åoveka kako pomno prati njegov govor i kako ima veru u spasenje.

imao je groznicu i srdobolju. Ovo ozdravljenje je privuklo mnoge da doœu kod Pavla iz istog razloga. dijagnoze i terapije. åak i u poloæaju brodolomnika u okovima. glavnog zvaniånika Malte. 81. Zbog toga.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 215 6. Ovim istraæivanjem æelim da ukaæem da. ukoliko vidimo jasan duhovni uzrok bolesti. 293. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. Pavlova molitva i polaganje ruku izleåili su ga. za koje åak smatram da su prioritetniji. Ne znamo da li Luka ovde implicira egzorcizam. 19 20 20 . iako tekst ne govori o tome. Moæemo pretpostaviti da su Pavle i drugi hriãñani propovedali dobru vest i imali nekoliko uspeha. ozdravljenje je doãlo kroz molitvu i polaganje Pavlovih ruku na bolesnika. snaæno je uzdrmao æivote kapetana. 28:7-9 – Pavle se moli za Pubijevog oca i on biva isceljen kao i mnogi drugi bolesnici na Malti. onda treba da. 1106. Bog je sve ovo vodio i uåinio da Pavle i ostali sa broda budu dobro snabdeveni za put do Rima. samo ili prvenstveno. Ne znamo jer se ne spominju zli duhovi kod sluåaja ove bolesti. kao i mnoge druge. govori se samo da su bili poåaãñeni na mnoge naåine. treba se moliti za isceljenje da Bog ozdravi tu osobu. vaæno mi je da napomenem da. i oni su ozdravljali.20 Implikacije Kada su bolesti u pitanju. Samo na ovom putovanju. Neki pisci komentrara misle da ih je izleåio lekar Luka koji je bio sa Pavlom. Svrhu bolesti nalazim u duhovnoj oblasti i zato smatram da nije dovoljno samo se fokusirati i leåiti fiziåke aspekte bolesti. Pavle je nastavio da sluæi drugima. bolest bude tretirana na duhovni naåin. ako posmatramo kompletno ljudsko biñe. 18 18 19 Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. postoje i duhovni aspetki bolesti.1199 Meœutim. 18 Otac ovog malteãkog vladara je bio bolestan. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. danas ñemo prvenstveno pomisliti na lekare i traæiñemo njihovo miãljenje. sem fiziåkih.

Zato. 115. Davids govori u knjizi “Wrestiling with dark angels”o bolestima s duhovnih aspekata. ovde su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. izbegavam ovde da generalizujem ili da iznosim neke zakljuåke koji bi u ovoj oblasti doveli do neke vrste iskljuåivosti. 9:32-34. Mt. moæemo se zapitati sledeñe: da li su demoni uzrok bolesti? Novi zavet navodi mnoge primere gde su demoni uzroånici bolesti. 12:22.23 Pogreãna dijagnoza opsednutosti demonima moæe imati katastrofalne posledice na nekoga ko je duãevno ili emocionalno bolestan pa to moæe uzrokovati snaæan oseñaj krivice i oseñaj da ih je Bog odbacio. Isus je iz deåaka isterao demona padavice (Mt. Kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Greh je uzrok bolesti. Demoni mogu biti uzrok bolesti. on ustanovljava tri uzroka bolesti: greh. 5:16. 8:16. 8:28-34. “ne tvrdim da je svaki duhovni problem rezultat direktne demonske aktivnosti. 7:21. Isterivao je demone iz slepih i nemih (Mt.21 Slaæem se sa Andersonom. Lk. 33. Dl. Kada dr Peter H. Ovo se moæe izbeñi ako se osoba uputi na odgovarajuñe psihijatrijsko leåenje. Oropeza citira Basil Jackson: Oropeza: 2001: str. 8:7). 1:34. Mk. 9:14-29. Mk. 9:37-43). Anderson:2002: str. ali ne smemo misliti da je u svakom sluåaju slepoñe. U I Kor. Zaista trebam odgovore na ovakva pitanja i verujem da se odgovor razlikuje od sluåaja do sluåaja. pa åak i duhovnog fanatizma. Pavle objaãnjava da neki u Korintu su slabi i bolesni zato ãto je njihov greh bio to ãto nisu 21 21 22 Vidi: Oropeza: 2001: str.22 Kada su u pitanju duãevne bolesti. 11:14-15) i iz onih poremeñena uma (Mt. “nemojte pobrkati duãevni poremeñaj s demonom. padavice ili drugih bolesti uzrok delovanje demona. 69. Lk. Bog i demonske sile. 11:30. 22 23 23 . Lk.13. Isceljivanje bolesti i izgon demona nije uvek jedno te isto (Mk. N° 9 Dakle.216 Teoloãki åasopis. 5:1-20. 8:26-39). 68. neizobraæenih ljudi napravilo je viãe ãtete nego dobra prepoznavajuñi demone ondje gdje ih nije bilo”. 17:14-21. Ali moæeã biti u ropstvu jer si previdio ili zanijekao realnost demonskih sila koje su na djelu u danaãnjem svijetu”. Lk. Previãe revnih.

Ako je greh uzrok bolesti. On smatra da do isceljenja od takve bolesti se dolazi ako je åovekova liånost okrenuta “Bogu radi unutraãnje ili mistiåne saradnje – to je uslov za zdravlje. 11). Ljudska istraæivanja o raznim bolestima i o njihovom leåenju su dostigla visok nivo. Verujem. Demonske sile su uzrok bolesti. i to je Boæiji dar. da li je Bog ikada uzrok bolesti? U Starom zavetu jeste (II Kr. 25 . 13:6-12). lakomstva. i joã neki mogu se direktno putem Duha Svetoga dovesti u vezu kod nekih osoba koje su zgreãile i obolele. Milaãinoviñ: 1995: str. gresi neverja poput odbacivanja milostivoga Boga ili ravnoduãnosti. Pavle zapoveda crkvama da odbace sramne greãnike koje ñe Satana uzeti za “propast tela”. 218-221. 15:5) a i u Novom zavetu: Irod Agripa (Dl. kao u sluåaju Jova da je Bog dozvolio Satani da iskuãa Jova i na taj naåin. uzeo bih to kao izuzetke ali ne i kao pravilo. Mada. 12:20-23). smatram da Bog ponekad interveniãe i na taj naåin. U I Kor.25 Istina je da je ljusko biñe zbog pada u greh postalo podloæno mnogim vrstama bolesti. Korinñani (I Kor. Gresi neopraãtanja i nepomirenja. ne bih se sasvim sloæio sa dr Davidson u vezi toga da je Bog uzrok bolesti.24 Dimitrije Kaleziñ smatra da je ljudsko biñe inficirano grehom i da je greh najåeãñi uzrok bolesti (neåiste sile ni ne spominje). Zato smatram da je potrebno otiñi kod lekara i posavetovati se sa 24 24 25 Vidi: Wagner: 1990: str. Zato nam je od velike pomoñi klasiåna medicina koja u danaãnje vreme åini skoro åuda. Luka 13:10-17 govori o æeni koja je zgråena oko 18 godina od “duha bolesti”. Bog je uzrok bolesti. Meœutim. i samo zdravlje”. Meœutim. kao ãto je i dr Davidson naveo neke svetopisamske primere. Varisus (Dl. 5:5. Ljudsko telo koje je Bog savrãeno stvorio nakon pada u greh ne funkcioniãe onako kako ga je Bog naåinio da funkcioniãe. 121-124. Smatram da Bog dozvoljava bolest zbog odreœenog cilja. U Novom zavetu su demoske sile viãe u vezi sa bolestima nego ãto je Bog.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 217 uvaæavali jedinstvo u Telu kao Gospodnju veåeru. vraåarstva i idolopoklonstva.

Ukoliko Bog i klasiåna medicina. jedan drugome grehe i molite se Bogu 26 Milaãinoviñ: 1995: Unutraãnja stranica na poleœinskoj korici knjige. Kada razmiãljam o duhovnim aspektima bolesti mislim samo na jedno reãenje: vera u Isusa Hrista. ne izleåe åoveka. i Gospod ñe ga podiñi. N° 9 njima kada smo bolesni. ako je i uåinio grehe. da pravimo neki univerzalni duhovni recept. I molitva vere spaãñe bolesnika. smatram da je ona od œavola iako se pokazuje kao pozitivna. Zakljuåio bih da ne bi bilo mudro da pokuãamo da gradimo bilo kakvu generalizaciju o bolestima na osnovu izabranih svetopisamskih odlomaka. kroz krizu verovanja. pa neka se pomole nad njim i pomaæu ga uljem u ime Gospodnje. kao moñnog Isceljitelja. kao imanentna potreba i spiritus movens naãe egzistencije jesu tvrœava na koje su kidisale sile neåastive. Izmeœu ostalog. trebamo koristititi i taj Boæiji dar. sile i one druge.218 Teoloãki åasopis. odnosno unesreñe”. kao Boæiji dar. bolest moæe biti samo prosto oboljenje neåega. Trebamo molitvom priñi Bogu i traæiti vodstvo Svetoga Duha da nam razjasni i da silu da reãimo odreœenu situaciju kada je bolest u pitanju. 26 . koje u svojoj alebiciji hoñe da nas usreñe. Ãto se tiåe bele magije. biñe mu oproãteno. dakle. Religiozna oseñanja. 26 Sveto pismo nam kaæe ãta da åinimo kada su u pitanju bolesti: “Boluje li ko meœu vama? Neka dozove crkvene stareãine. “dobronamerna”. S druge strane. ako je neko bolestan i ne moæe da ozdravi treba da zna da je duãa vaænija od tela i da treba da se mnogo viãe fokusira na spasenje svoje duãe kroz veru u Isusa Hrista. Drugim reåima. pre svega. “kriza savremene civilizacije prepoznaje se. nemojmo uvek smatrati da je u pitanju neki demon jer je vrlo lako moguñe da je u pitanju samo neka telesna bolest koju ñe lekari reãiti bez ikakve muke. smatram da tu nema nikakve druge ãanse da se åovek izleåi na ispravan naåin. Slaæem se sa dr Jovanom N. Inaåe. Strikoviñem. Ispovedajte. Bela magija pokuãava da otkloni bolest jer ne moæe da izleåi åoveka.

kojom se oznaåava vrhunska strast kao vera. Lee Ash Antony 1986 Djela apostolska: tumaåenje Djela apostolskih. A. Ovi stihovi nam govore kako da najpravilnije postupimo da ne bismo napravili katastrofalne greãke. su za mene prvi i kljuåni postupci pri ozdravljenju ili isceljenju bolesnika. Hrvatska: Logos Daruvar. 5:14-16 naglasci su moji!).” (Jak. ur. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. . Carson D. 1994 New bible commentary. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. Neil 2002 On lomi okove. da budete isceljeni. Ne moæe se ni opstati ni ostati bez njenog udela!”27 Vera je kljuå. Ovo je po mom miãljenju prvi korak kada su u pitanju bolesti. Downers Grove. Mnogo moæe delotvorna molitva pravednika. CITIRANA DELA Anderson T. 27 27 Isto. ispovedanje greha. Molitva vere. niãta se ne moæe razumeti. voleti. usvojiti bez prisustva vere. Zato trebamo znati da “smisao naãeg æivota i æivljenja nije u onom smislu koji ñe odrediti neko drugi veñ u egzistenciji vere. posredniåka delotvorna molitva pravednika i isceljivanje u ime Gospodnje (u ime Isusa Hrista). Dæejms 1999 Luka: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 219 jedan za drugoga. Zaista. Galvin C. Daruvar. prihvatiti. Illinois: IVP.

Verman R.A.: Regal Books. Beograd: ZAVOD ZA BOLESTI ZAVISNOSTI I PARTENON M. Hrvatska: STEPress. IZDANJE BIBLIJSKOG DRUÃTVA BEOGRAD. Ventura. Javier. N° 9 Milaãinoviñ Jasmina 1995 Religija i duãevni æivot åoveka. Åarniña. U. 2000 O anœelima. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije.220 Teoloãki åasopis. Kalifornija. Oropeza B. . demonima i duhovnom ratovanju: 99 pitanja i odgovora.S. Peter 1990 Wrestling with dark angels. Zagreb.M. Novi zavet: prevod dr Emilijana M. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. David 2001 Dela apostolska: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje.A. Wagner C. Moris Leon 1983 Luka: tumaåenje Evanœelja po Luki.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful